Delhi High Court
Sonica Jaggi vs Lt. Governor And Ors. on 27 January, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) No.1174/2008
% 27th January, 2017
SONICA JAGGI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajiv Aneja, Advocate.
versus
LT. GOVERNOR AND ORS. ..... 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 who is working as Physical Education Teacher
in Shakti Mandir Premwati Public School, represented by respondent
nos.4 to 6, seeks the relief of being granted the pay scale of Physical
Education Teacher at Rs.5500-9000/- inasmuch as the petitioner pleads
that she is being granted a lower pay scale of Rs.4500-125-7000/-.
2. The petitioner admittedly was appointed as a Physical
Education Teacher with the Shakti Mandir Premwati Public School and
this is clear from the certificate annexed as Annexure-A to the writ
petition which reads as under:-
"Shakti Mandir Premwati Public School
(Affiliated with C.B.S.E.)
1024, SHAKTI MANDIR, DARYA GANJ, NEW DELHI-110002
Ref. No. Dated 13-5-03
To Whom So Ever It May Concern
This is to certify that Mrs. Sonica Jaggi is working in this institution
from 2nd July 2001 as a Physical Education Teacher. Her Pay Scale is
4500-125-7000.
She is found a very hardworking and dedicated teacher. I wish her
success in life.
Manager sd/-
Principal"
3. The pay scale of a Physical Education Teacher as per the
recruitment rules is Rs.5500-9000/- as per the 5th Pay Commission
Report in terms of the recruitment rules of the Physical Education
Teacher which has been filed as Annexure A-5 to the writ petition.
Petitioner therefore being appointed as a Physical Education Teacher
would be entitled to the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/- in terms of
circular of Director of Education dated 23.2.1984 read with Section 10
of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 which states that teachers and
employees of the private schools will not get monetary benefits which
are lesser than similar employees of government schools. The
respondent nos.4 to 6/school in the present case is a private unaided
school.
4. The only defence raised by the respondent nos.4 to
6/school in its counter affidavit is that the petitioner with open eyes
took appointment as an Assistant Teacher, was appointed as an
Assistant Teacher, the pay scale of an Assistant Teacher is Rs.4500-
125-7000/-, and therefore, now the petitioner cannot claim the higher
pay scale of a Physical Education Teacher.
5. In my opinion, the writ petition is bound to succeed in
view of Section 10 of the Delhi School Education Act read with
circular of the Director of Education dated 23.2.1984 showing
recruitment rules for appointment to the post of Physical Education
Teacher providing the scale of pay of Rs.5500-9000/- to a Physical
Education Teacher. Merely because the school is violating the law and
paying less does not mean that there is an estoppel against the law, and
which law is Section 10 of the Delhi School Education Act. Petitioner
hence will be entitled to the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000/-, however, in
view of law of limitation being applicable to writ petitions by virtue of
the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa and
Another Vs. Mamta Mohanty (2011) 3 SCC 436, petitioner will be
entitled to the higher scale of pay with consequential benefits
prospectively from the date of three years prior to filing of the writ
petition viz from 13.2.2005 prospectively and not for a period prior to
13.2.2005.
6. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed and
respondent nos.4 to 6/school, namely Shakti Mandir Premwati Public
School will pay the pay scale with consequential monetary benefits to
the petitioner as a Physical Education Teacher in the scale of Rs.5500-
9000/- w.e.f 13.2.2005 and thereafter continuously till date and further
till the petitioner continues in her appointment as a Physical Education
Teacher with the respondent nos.4 to 6/school.
7. Writ petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of in
terms of the aforesaid observations. Respondent nos.4 to 6/school will
take steps to calculate the dues of the petitioner in terms of the present
judgment and the same be paid to the petitioner preferably within a
period of three months from today. Parties are left to bear their own
costs.
JANUARY 27, 2017 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
Ne
