Be perceived as university which has empathy: HC to DU

The Delhi High Court today told the Delhi University (DU) to show empathy towards a visually impaired man who could not arrive here in time for his MPhil entrance exam as he could not board a reserved train coach as it was locked from the inside.
"How can you (DU) possibly contest this plea? Be perceived as a university which has empathy," a bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar said to the varsity which was opposed to specially allowing the student to give the entrance exam held on July 5.
The court also asked the university to inform it on the next date how it distributed, among the various disabilities, the five per cent seats reserved for disabled category in the MPhil course.

The bench sought the information after the lawyer for the visually impaired student, Vaibhav Shukla, claimed that the varsity equally distributes the seats reserved for the disabled among the various disabilities.
Shukla's lawyer also said only three persons, including the petitioner, had applied for the MPhil Sanskrit entrance exam under the disabled category and the other two, who were able to give the test, suffered from locomotor disability.
The other two students scored only 67 out of 400, coming to 16.75 per cent, in the test, Shukla's lawyer also claimed.

The university's lawyer said an affidavit would be filed with regard to the claims made on behalf of the petitioner.

The bench, thereafter, listed the matter for hearing tomorrow and asked DU to bring the admission form records of the candidates who applied for the MPhil Sanskrit course in the 2017-18 academic session.
The court was hearing a PIL which it initiated on its own after coming across a news report that a young man missed his MPhil test as the door of a special coach for disabled in the Gorakhdham Express was shut.
The bench on the last date had blamed the Railways for the young man missing his train and had told it to treat the disabled as the "most treasured" passengers.

According to Shukla, he had tried to reach Delhi on July 3 for the exam to be held on July 5, but could not as he first did not get a confirmed seat.
On July 4 when he arrived at the station the train was running late. When it finally arrived, the coach for the disabled was locked from inside so he could not enter it, his lawyer had told the court.
"You need to do much more," it had told the Railways which had claimed that it has re-designed 3,200 out of nearly one lakh luggage coaches to be made disabled-friendly, and work was going on regarding the rest.

The court had advised the Railways not to put such special coaches at the extreme front or rear of a train as at smaller stations these would be outside the platform area making it difficult for those disabled to access them easily.
Instead, put such coaches in the middle, the bench had said and had also suggested doing away with berths on one side of the coaches to enable easier access and hassle-free movement of stretchers and wheelchairs.