Asha Rani Gupta vs Ravindra Memorial Public School ...
2013 Latest Caselaw 1187 Del

*     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

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

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