Delhi High Court
Naveen Chandra Jha vs The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Nct ... on 23 April, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23 April, 2012
+ W.P.(C) 1409/2012
NAVEEN CHANDRA JHA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kartar Singh , Adv.
versus
THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF
NCT AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mrs. Rachna Saxena , Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Vide order dated 10.04.2012, liberty was granted to the respondent to
file a short affidavit. However, the same is not on record.
2. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties, the instant petition is taken up for final disposal.
3. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought to issue the writ of
mandamus directing the respondents to provide automatic re-employment to
the petitioner for a period of two years under the notifications dated
29.01.2007 and 27.01.2012.
4. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner retired from
service on 30.06.2011. Before retirement, he gave his option for re-
employment for a period of two years which was not accepted by the
respondent No.2 stating that there was no scheme for re-employment for
Vice-Principles and Principles.
5. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the decision of
this Court in the case of Dharam Singh vs. The chief Secretary and Anr.
in WP(C)4703/2011dated 08.07.2012, the petitioner approached the office of
respondent No.2. He was given an assurance that the respondent No.2 may
take decision on the issue while passing a general order for the re-
employment scheme for Vice-Principles and Principles also. Finally, on
27.01.2012 the respondent No.2 passed an order to this effect.
6. Thereafter, respondent No.2 invited applications for re-employment
for a period of two years.
7. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that till date no order has been
passed regarding the petitioner. Having no option, the petitioner issued a
legal notice dated 15.02.2012 to the respondents, which was also of no avail.
8. Ld. counsel further submits that earlier the respondents made
arrangement for re-employment of retiring teachers up to PGT level, subject
to fitness and vigilance clearance till they attain the age of 62 years or till
clearance from the Government of India for extending the retirement age
whichever is earlier. The terms and conditions of re-employment have also
been notified separately vide notification dated 29.01.2007.
9. It is further submitted that after the decision in the case of Dharm
Singh (supra), another order was issued on 27.01.2012 by which the
facility of re-employment was also extended to the Vice-Principles and
Principles. The earlier terms and conditions remained same subject to that
there are application from the willing candidates, their vigilance clearance,
till they attain the age of 62 years, whichever is earlier.
10. It is also clarified by the aforesaid order dated 27.01.2012 that they
will get the financial benefit only with effect from the date of assuming
work.
11. In my considered opinion, the petitioner fulfilled all the conditions,
i.e., he gave his option even before the retirement and his request continued
to remain pending on the ground that there was no scheme for re-
employment for Vice-Principles and Principles. Nowhere it was
communicated to the petitioner that his vigilance report is not cleared or that
he is not fit for re-employment.
12. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed.
13. The respondent No.2 shall allow the petitioner to join w.e.f.
01.05.2012. The petitioner will be entitled to salary from the date of joining
his duty.
14. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
APRIL 23, 2012
RS
