Delhi High Court
Ved Prakash Singh vs R C Jain & Ors on 2 February, 2015
Author: Suresh Kait
$~3 to 6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 2nd February, 2015
+ CONT.CAS(C) 268/2014
+ CONT.CAS(C) 270/2014
+ CONT.CAS(C) 271/2014 & CM Nos. 12161/2014
+ CONT.CAS(C) 275/2014 & CM Nos. 12303/2014
PRAMOD KUMAR ..... Petitioner/Contemnor
in CONT. CAS (C) No.268/2014
CHANDRA PRAKASH ..... Petitioner/Contemnor
in CONT. CAS (C) No.270/2014
SHASHI BHUSHAN PANDEY ..... Petitioner/Contemnor
in CONT. CAS (C) No.271/2014
VED PRAKASH SINGH ..... Petitioner/Contemnor
in CONT. CAS (C) No.275/2014
Represented by: Mr.V.N.Jha, Advocate.
Versus
R C JAIN & ORS ..... Respondents
Represented by:Mr. Dinesh Agnani, Sr.
Advocate with Mr. Divakar Prasad, Advocate
Mr. Pankaj Jain in person for R-1,2&3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Vide these petitions, the petitioner seek to initiate contempt
proceedings under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
for violation of order dated 18.11.2013 passed by this Court in
WP(C) No.3869/1999 and WP(C) 5150/1999.
2. It is pertinent to reproduce the relevant part of order dated
18.11.2013 whereby this Court recorded as under:-
"3. The terms of settlement which are agreed are
stated hereinafter:
4. A total of 20 persons would be continued in their
employment with the school subject to the terms of
emoluments with respect to past arrears and further
benefits as will be detailed here-in-after. The
names of 20 persons are given below:
Sr. No. Name
1. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ray
2. Ms. Kiran Khatri
3. Ms. Kavita
4. Ms. Vimlesh Singhal
5. Ms. Reeta Vats
6. Ms. Sunita Sharma
7. Ms. Prem Mendiratta
8. Ms. Sanjita Bhardwaj
9. Ms. Tripti Das
10. Ms. Nutan
11. Ms. Shashi Kala
12. Ms. S. Ghoshal
13. Ms. Nokesh Gupta
14. Ms. Veena Chauhan
15. Ms. Usha Kukreti
16. Mrs. Nirmal Kadian
17. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Pandey
18. Mr. Ved Prakash Singh
19. Mr. Chandra Prakash
20. Mr. Pramod Kumar
5. These aforesaid 20 persons will be continued in their
employment with the school subject to the following
conditions:-
(a) These 20 petitioners are to be continued in their
employment from the dates of the original
appointments so far as first 16 persons are concerned,
and so far as the last 4 persons are concerned, they
would be treated as permanent on the completion of
their respective probationary periods.
(b) The first 16 persons as a part of the settlement
will get 20% of the salary emoluments which are
payable for 150 months period, and which 150
months will be calculated as 150 months back from
passing of today's order qua the teachers at serial
nos. 1 to 16. In order to avoid any confusion,
disputes or ambiguity the amount payable to the
sixteen persons is agreed at Rs.1.5 lacs each
towards full and final settlement. These 16 teachers
on receipt of Rs.1.5 lacs each give up any and every
other monetary claim with respect to past arrears
against the school, and inasmuch as, as a result of
the settlement, the school is not questioning the
order of the Director of Education to reinstate these
16 persons/teachers.
(c) The persons mentioned at serial Nos. 17 to 20
i.e. Mr. Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Mr. Ved Prakash
Singh, Mr. Chandra Prakash and Mr. Pramod
Kumar will not receive any monetary emoluments
for a period for which they did not work with the
school i.e. nothing will be payable to these 4
persons as monetary emoluments till date subject
however to the term of their being paid salaries
from today as stated here-in-after.
(d) On and from the dates of their now joining
duties with the school, each of the 20 teachers as
stated above, will get the same salary package
which is payable to an equivalent teacher in
Government schools of the Govt. of NCT of Delhi as
on the dates of their joining the school. This pay
package will be payable from the dates of joining of
the 20 persons with the school and it is agreed that
on or before 1.4.2014 these 20 persons will one by
one be taken back for performing their duties in the
school. To the extent possible these 20 teachers will
be taken back in proportion every month till
31.3.2014/1.4.2014.
(e) Though so far as the four persons, namely Mr.
Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Mr. Ved Prakash Singh,
Mr. Chandar Prakash and Mr. Pramod Kumar are
concerned, they will not get any amounts as arrears
till today, however, it is clarified that these persons
will get all consequential increases in their pay
packages as on date so that on the date of their
joining they will get salary package to a teacher of
the Govt. school of Govt. NCT of Delhi as payable
on those dates.
(f) Each of the 20 persons will though are getting a
lump sum amount of Rs.1.5 lacs each towards past
arrears, being the petitioners 1 to 16, and no
arrears being the petitioners 17 to 20, however,
whatever were the pay scales in this past period
from the dates of their termination of services, such
theoretical pay package enhancement would be
deemed to be granted to them for the purpose of
calculating their retirement benefits including
gratuity, PPF etc. etc. While stating this it is
clarified that so far as the actual monetary
emoluments for the period for which the petitioners
have not been worked with the school only monetary
emoluments will be limited to Rs.1.5 lacs each.
(g) On the aforesaid 20 teachers joining the school
it is agreed that both the parties will be governed by
the Delhi School Act and Rules, 1973."
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the respondent school issued
office order dated 31.03.2014 which reads as under:-
" In pursuance of order dated 18/11/2013 passed by
Hon'ble Delhi High Court, Delhi in W.P.(C)
3869/1999 and 5150/1999, I am directed to inform
Mr. Pramod Kumar (Asstt. Tr.), to report for his
duties on probation in the school on 1st April 2014
at 7.30 A.M."
4. The petitioners being aggrieved with the aforesaid order filed
the present petitions submitting that they were permanent
employees of the respondent school. However, vide order dated
31.03.2014 they have been shown as on probation. Having no
option, the petitioners joined their duties on 01.04.2014 and
immediately thereafter filed these petitions.
5. I note, in the order dated 18.11.2013, it is specifically stated
that 16 out of 20 were treated as permanent and these 4 petitioners
would be treated as permanent on completion of their respective
probationary periods.
6. Mr. Dinesh Agnani, learned senior counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent school submitted that the petitioners joined
the school on 01.07.1997 as Assistant Teachers on probation and
their probation was extended for a period of one year till
30.06.1999. Since their services were terminated on 14.03.1999
during probation period, and at the time of termination they have
only completed 1 year and 7 ½ months on probation; leaving 3 ½
months more to be completed as probation. Thereafter, the
respondent school, finding their work not satisfactory, terminated
the services of the petitioners vide order dated 16.05.2014 and
30.08.2014.
7. These petitions are contempt petitions. There are claims and
counter claims and the respondents have complied with the order
dated 18.11.2013, however, the petitioners dispute the same.
8. In view of the submissions of the counsel for the parties, I am
of the considered opinion that let the petitioners file appropriate
petition to seek relief, however, I am not inclined to pass any order
in these petitions.
9. Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with liberty to
the petitioners to file appropriate petitions or get WP(C)
No.3869/1999 revived.
10. The petitions are disposed of accordingly.
11. Contempt notices stand discharged.
12. All the pending applications stand dismissed being
infructuous.
SURESH KAIT, J
FEBRUARY 02, 2015
RS
