Delhi High Court
Mrs. Sunita Nayyar vs Director Of Education & Ors. on 5 May, 2015
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) No.8170/2014
% 5th May, 2015
MRS. SUNITA NAYYAR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Advocate with
Mr. Anuj Agarwal
versus
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Ms. Nidhi Raman, Advocate for
respondent no.1
Mr. Vikas Nagpal, Advocate for
respondent nos.2 and 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
petitioner, who is an employee of respondent no.3/J.L.D.A.V. Public School,
seeks the relief that respondent no.1/The Directorate of Education be directed
to take action against respondent no.2/D.A.V. College Managing Committee
and respondent no.3/J.L.D.A.V. Public School for harassing the petitioner.
2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is admittedly an employee of
respondent no.3/School. On account of a complaint made by the petitioner of
W.P.(C) No.8170 /2014 Page 1 of 5
her harassment by the respondent no.3/School, including existence of
unhygienic conditions in the respondent no.3/School and non-assignment of
subjects and proper duties to the petitioner, the Directorate of Education had
got conducted an inspection and the Enquiry Committee gave its report dated
12.8.2013 finding true the case of harassment of the petitioner.
3. There were earlier legal proceedings between the parties and a Division
Bench of this Court in LPA No.337/2013 directed the respondent no.1/
Directorate of Education to look into the grievances of the petitioner and
redress the same. This order dated 20.5.2013 was passed in LPA No.337/2013
titled as Sunita Nayyar Vs. Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors. On the direction
of the Directorate of Education, another enquiry committee was constituted
and this Enquiry Committee by its report dated 10.12.2014 found that the
respondent no.3/School has falsely/wrongly stated that unhygienic conditions
were removed and that the petitioner was not being harassed.
4. The conclusion in this second report of the Enquiry Committee dated
10.12.2014 reads as under:-
"Conclusion:-
From the investigations on the fact finding inquiry, on the complaint
and after the advisory by the Distt. Office, the Committee collected
evidence and statements of the students and the Committee came to
conclusion that the allegations against the management and Principal of
W.P.(C) No.8170 /2014 Page 2 of 5
the school made by Mrs. Sunita Nayyar are correct to the extent that the
situation remains the same or deteriorated in cleanliness, Hygiene. The
ground even assembly stage was not clean. There were mosquito web
here and there basically near toilets. There were open dustbins kept
basically in toilets and in verandah, Teachers are under paid, Service
record is not maintained properly, MACP/Promotions are not being
made in accordance to Govt. Rules. Harassment and humiliation to the
teach is proved with the accessment of time table wherein it was
noticed that she has been allotted just ten periods in a week to teach. A
teacher with 30 years of long service is made to sit idle just to humiliate
her. On enquiry from the small kids of class ii, iii and v all the students
had praised the teacher but the sitting teachers were afraid to sign the
statements. The students of class XI/C (Ms. Bhawaya, Komal
Budhiraja, Simran Sabhaarwal, Lakshay Malhotra and many more who
were afraid to sign submitted as under:-
1. There is no proper Home science lab.
2. New machine for gym required.
3. Instruments for music room required
4. Carpets in gym, music, dance rooms
5. Proper music system for dance room
6. No proper facility or water in washroom
7. No pure drinking water
8. Needs of utensils and refrigerator.
Report may kindly be pursued and necessary orders to school
Admn. may be given.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
Mrs. Kamla Nibhal Sh. MUKESH DOGRA Sh. Gautam Arora
E.O. Zone 17 Asstt. Accounts Officer ADE(WB)
Member Member Member
Sd/-
Mrs. Kamlesh Bains
Z.O. Zone 18,
Chairman"
W.P.(C) No.8170 /2014 Page 3 of 5
5. I am informed by the learned counsels for the parties that the
Directorate of Education has now again issued a show cause notice to
respondent no.3/School pursuant to this second report of the Enquiry
Committee and the learned counsel appearing for respondent no.3/School says
that the respondent no.3/School has removed all the grievances of the
petitioner, which have been found against the respondent no.3/School as per
the second report of the Enquiry Committee dated 10.12.2014.
6. In view of the above, the learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that
this writ petition can be disposed of by giving directions that the Directorate
of Education will now look into the reply to the show cause notice given by
respondent no.3/School to the report of the Enquiry Committee dated
10.12.2014, and the Directorate of Education will take action against the
respondent no.3/School under the provisions of the Delhi School Education
Act and Rules, 1973, if the conclusions of the second Enquiry Committee
dated 10.12.2014 are correct and the harassment of the petitioner has
continued. The Directorate of Education can also, if required, conduct a
surprise inspection of the respondent no.3/School with respect to the
grievances raised by the petitioner. Of course, if all the grievances of the
petitioner which are the subject matter of the Delhi School Education Act and
W.P.(C) No.8170 /2014 Page 4 of 5
Rules, 1973 have been removed, then, obviously the Directorate of Education
need not thereafter proceed against the respondent no.3/School.
7. Let the Directorate of Education take and complete the necessary
proceedings pursuant to the report of the second Enquiry Committee dated
10.12.2014 within a period of six weeks from today and the petitioner will be
informed of the steps which have been taken by the Directorate of Education
to ensure compliance of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 as
regards her complaint.
8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly in terms of the aforesaid
observations.
9. No costs.
MAY 05, 2015 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
nn
