New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has sought a report addressing the alleged lack of purified drinking water, Wi-Fi, air conditioning, and other essential facilities at Delhi University’s Faculty of Law.
This directive was issued by Justice Amit Sharma in response to a plea highlighting severe inadequacies at the institution.
Justice Sharma appointed Advocate Rajesh Mishra as an amicus curiae to assist in examining and resolving the infrastructural deficiencies.
A meeting was ordered to be convened between key stakeholders, including Dean of Students’ Welfare, Dean of Faculty of Law, Advocate Ankur Singh Mavi (the petitioner), and the amicus curiae to discuss provisions for purified drinking water and other facilities including Wi-Fi services.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) was also impleaded as a respondent in this matter.
The petitioners, Ronak Khatri, Ankur Singh Mavi, and Umesh Kumar, all students at Law Faculty, argued that the absence of air conditioning in classrooms during peak summer months, when temperatures in Delhi can soar up to 48 degrees Celsius, has created unbearable conditions.
They highlighted the stark contrast between the well-cooled administrative offices and staff rooms and the overheated classrooms, particularly those in the third building constructed with makeshift materials such as tin roofs and asbestos-lined walls. These conditions have reportedly led to health issues such as heat strokes and fainting among students.
The plea also pointed out that the Faculty of Law, which accommodates around 5,000 students, has only four water coolers, insufficient to meet the demand. The dire situation has forced students to buy packaged drinking water, significantly increasing their educational expenses.
Connectivity issues were another major concern raised by the students, with poor Wi-Fi coverage hampering their access to essential academic resources.
The University claimed that necessary provisions for water coolers and drinking water already exist on campus. However, the court has asked the University to coordinate with the stakeholders and the amicus curiae to ensure a thorough review and to file a report before the next hearing, scheduled on July 4.
“Let the meeting be convened with the mutual convenience of the parties within one week from today. Mr Mohinder J. S. Rupal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, shall coordinate the same with the aforesaid stakeholders, and a report regarding the same be placed on record before the next date of hearing,” the court ordered.
(INAS)
