Gurvinder Singh Saini vs School Management Of Guru ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 3339 Del

29
$~
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+       W.P.(C) 8327/2008 & CM No.4909/2011 (u/O-1 R-10)

        GURVINDER SINGH SAINI                     ..... Petitioner
                     Through: Mr. Raj Kumar Sherawat & Mr.
                              Naresh Kumare Sherawat, Advocates.

                          Versus

        SCHOOL MANAGEMENT OF GURU HARKISHAN PUBLIC
        SCHOOL & ORS                            ..... Respondents
                     Through: Mr. Sachin Chopra with Mr. Amit
                              Kumar Dodhich, Advocates for R-4.
        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

                                  ORDER

% 14.07.2011

1. The grievance of the petitioner claiming to be the Staff Secretary of

the staff of respondent no.1 Guru Harkishan Public School, Hari Nagar,

Delhi in this petition stated to be filed for benefit of and to claim directions

for the entire staffs of the said School, is of non-compliance by the

respondent no.1 GHP School, Hari Nagar, Delhi of Section 10 of the Delhi

School Education Act. It is contended that the School is not paying to its

staff the emoluments as being payable by Schools of Corresponding Status

run by the Delhi Government.

WP(C)8327/2008 page 1 of 3

2. Notice of the writ petition was issued and pleadings have been

completed.

3. The counsel for the respondent no.1 School has today explained the

difficulties for the reasons whereof it is admitted that the School is unable to

pay the emoluments as per above terms. It is further informed that the

respondent no.4 Directorate of Education (DOE) has already for the said

reason derecognized the School on 4th February, 2011; that an appeal of the

School to the Administrator, Delhi is pending consideration and is listed

next on 3rd August, 2011.

4. Even though the respondent no.2 School may be facing difficulties, it

cannot be absolved of complying with Section 10 (supra). Upon failure by

the respondent no.1 School to comply with Section 10, the respondent no.4

DOE is required to take action against the respondent no.1 School and its

Managing Committee and which action as aforesaid has already been taken.

5. However it is deemed expedient to grant time till the end of the

current academic session i.e. till 31st March, 2012 to the respondent no.1

School to comply with Section 10 and to pay the emoluments in terms

thereof including arrears, to its staff. If the respondent no.1 School fails to WP(C)8327/2008 page 2 of 3 do so, the respondent no.4 DOE is directed to proceed further in accordance

with law.

The writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

                                               RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
JULY 14, 2011/bs




WP(C)8327/2008                                                    page 3 of 3