Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: dsgmc in New Delhi Municipal Council vs Manju Tomar on 28 August, 2024Matching Fragments
5. It is claimed that over a period of time, the building of the school became old and dilapidated and also, considering the growing number of devotees visiting the Gurudwara, the appellant- DSGMC was finding it difficult to run the school on a day-to-day basis. The appellant-DSGMC, therefore, decided to shift the school from its existing location to a new premises i.e. at Mata Sundari College, Old Building, New Delhi. Since the school was receiving 95% grant from the NDMC, the appellant-DSGMC moved the NDMC seeking permission to shift the school.
6. Upon receiving information about the proposed shifting of the school by the appellant-DSGMC, the Headmistress and other staff of the school challenged the said proposal by filing Writ Petitions3 in the High Court of Delhi. An ex-parte stay order dated 30th May, 2005 was passed by the learned Single Judge of High Court of Delhi, staying the proposed shifting of the school. However, in spite of the stay order being granted and having been communicated, the appellant-DSGMC demolished a substantial part of the school building thereby, making it non-functional. Consequent to the demolition of the school building, the NDMC stopped the grant-in- aid under Rule 69 of the Delhi Education Act and Rules, 1973 (hereinafter after being referred to as ‘Delhi Education Rules’) on the reasoning that it was under an obligation to provide grant-in- aid to schools which fell within its territorial jurisdiction and that the alternate location selected by the appellant-DSGMC, i.e., Mata Sundari College was outside the jurisdiction of the NDMC. WP(C) Nos. 9951-52/2005
In the absence of such communication, the offer from the DSGMC did not exist. Hence, DSGMC is in breach of the orders of the Division Bench and the orders which had directed that all the five petitioners be re- employed within twelve weeks of the order dated 09.12.2009. The said time got over on 08.03.2010. Due to the non-compliance the second limb of the order becomes operative. Resultantly, the petitioners are entitled to full pay and all perquisites from 04.03.2010 onwards till 30.01.2018. Respondent no. 4-DSGMC shall, therefore, pay the petitioner nos. 1 to 5 their full pay and all perquisites in terms of the order of the Division Bench dated 08.02.2010. The said monies shall be paid to them within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The interest on the delay will be considered thereafter.
16. Thus, in the present appeals, the only issue which requires adjudication is as to whether the appellant-DSGMC has any valid ground so as to assail the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 9th December, 2009, whereby the NDMC was directed to reimburse the pay and perquisites including the pension and other benefits accruing to the staff of the school and “then to recover the same from the appellant-DSGMC”.
17. Shri Ritesh Khatri, learned counsel representing the appellant-DSGMC, while referring to Rule 47 of the Delhi Education Rules, urged that where as a result of closure of a recognised school, or withdrawal of the recognition, the staff of the school becomes surplus, they may be absorbed as far as possible in a Government school or aided school. As per learned counsel, the teachers and other staff of the school who became surplus on account of closure of the school would be entitled to the benefit under Rule 47 of the Delhi Education Rules. Thus, in sum and substance, the contention of learned counsel representing the appellant-DSGMC is that the NDMC and the Director (Education), NDMC are primarily responsible for absorption and payment of salary and other service benefits to the staff, which became surplus on account of closure of the school. However, we find it difficult to sustain this argument which is fallacious on the face of record. The closure which is contemplated in Rule 47 of the Delhi Education Rules has to be a valid closure, i.e., having been carried out with the prior approval of the Director as provided under Rule 46 of the Delhi Education Rules which reads as under:-