Smt. Swaran Lata vs Rashtrapati Bhavan, Kalyan ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 427 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         W.P.(C) No. 11899/2006


%                                                        24th January, 2017

SMT. SWARAN LATA                                              ..... Petitioner

                          Through:       None.

                          versus

RASHTRAPATI BHAVAN, KALYAN KENDRA AND ANR.
                                       ..... Respondents

                          Through:       None.

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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, the petitioner/Smt. Swaran Lata challenges the letter of termination of

her services dated 1.5.2006 issued by the respondent no. 1/Rashtrapati

Bhavan, Kalyan Kendra.

2. Petitioner claims that the she was appointed as a teacher by the

respondent no. 1 and worked without any break from 17.7.1990 to 1.5.2006

and hence her termination from services is illegal.

3. Respondent no. 1 has filed a counter affidavit and stated that

respondent no. 1 is a private organization which was established on

10.8.1971 by the then President Sh. V.V. Giri for social upliftment of

women, improvement of standard of living of families of workers in

Rashtrapati Bhavan, etc. It is prayed that appointment of the petitioner was

admittedly in terms of the appointment letter on temporary basis and which

was to be terminable on 15 days notice of either side. It was also pleaded

that against the petitioner complaints were received that petitioner was not

teaching and conducting her classes besides not paying attention towards

education of the children and hence the petitioner's services were

discontinued by letter dated 1.5.2006.

4. The writ petition will lie in this Court only if there is a school

which will be governed by the Delhi School Education Act, 1973.

Respondent no. 1 is not running any 'school' governed by Delhi School

Education Act because respondent no. 1 is a private association for

upliftment/welfare of families of workers of Rashtrapati Bhavan and was

not running a school within the meaning of the expression 'school' under

the Delhi School Education Act.

5. Accordingly, since there is no school under the Delhi School

Education Act of which the petitioner was an employee/teacher, and the fact

that respondent no. 1 is a private organization created only for

upliftment/welfare of the employees working in Rashtrapati Bhavan, this

writ petition is not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.

6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

JANUARY 24, 2017/ AK                             VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J