Delhi High Court
Asha Rani Gupta vs Ravindra Memorial Public School And Anr on 8 March, 2013
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
Bench: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ WP(C) No.4757/2012
% March 08, 2013
ASHA RANI GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Kusum Sharma, Adv.
versus
RAVINDRA MEMORIAL PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ANR
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. S.K.Shukla, Adv. for R-1.
Ms. Sangeeta Sondhi with
Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. In this writ petition, there are essentially two issues. One is the claim of the petitioner that she has not been allowed to join the services of the school. Second is with regard to implementation of the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission read with the circular dated 11.2.2009 of the Director of Education.
2. So far as the issue of the termination of the services of the WP(C) No.4757/2012 Page 1 of 3 petitioner is concerned, the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of Shashi Gaur vs. NCT of Delhi & Ors., 2001 (10) SCC 445 has held that every sort of removal from service, is actionable by filing an appeal before the Delhi School Tribunal. Since in the present case, the first grievance effectively is that the petitioner's services have been terminated, so far as this relief is concerned, the petitioner will be entitled to approach the Delhi School Tribunal in accordance with law.
3. So far as the second relief of payment as per the Sixth Pay Commission Report is concerned, there are two sub aspects. First is the date till which it is payable and secondly, if it has been paid or not.
4. With regard to the date, a reading of para 2.3 of the counter affidavit shows that the petitioner is alleged to have absented from school from 22.11.2011. Therefore, till 22.11.2011, the petitioner will have to be paid salary as also arrears as per the Sixth Pay Commission Report, and it is directed accordingly.
5. Counsel for the respondent No.1 however draws the attention of this Court to para 2.4 of the counter affidavit as per which the teachers have already been paid as per the recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission.
6. Accordingly, it is ordered that the petitioner will be entitled to WP(C) No.4757/2012 Page 2 of 3 payment of salary as also additional monetary benefits in terms of the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission and the order of the Director of Education dated 11.2.2009, provided the respondent No.1/school has not already paid the said amount to the petitioner. This payment now, if not already paid, be made within a period of 6 weeks from today.
7. Writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
MARCH 08, 2013
ak
WP(C) No.4757/2012 Page 3 of 3