Ashu Rani vs The Manager, Dhanpatmal Virmani ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 925 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          Date of Order : February 07, 2018
+     W.P.(C) 1160/2018
      ASHU RANI                                           ..... Petitioner
                           Through:     Mr. K.P. Gupta, Advocate

                           Versus

      THE MANAGER, DHANPATMAL VIRMANI SR. SEC.
      SCHOOL AND ORS.                       ..... Respondents
                   Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing
                   Counsel for GNCTD (Service) & Mr. N.K.
                   Singh, Advocate
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                           ORDER

(ORAL)

1. Petitioner had applied for the advertised post of Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) in Mathematics, but petitioner was unsuccessful and in this petition, she assails appointment of respondent No.7, who has been selected as TGT (Mathematics) in Dhanpatmal Virmani Senior Secondary School, Roop Nagar, Delhi. Petitioner alleges that degree of Masters in Mathematics held by seventh respondent is fabricated one and there is interpolation of marks given in the interview to respondent No.7 and that it is so evident from consolidated list of candidates (Annexure P-

2), who were called for interview for the post in question.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is working as Guest Teacher in some other school and since seventh respondent is not qualified, therefore, as per result of interview, petitioner is eligible to be

appointed as TGT (Maths). It is submitted that petitioner had made several Representations but to no avail and she had also sent a Legal Notice (Annexure P-10) on 1st December, 2017 to respondents but there is no response and that verification of M.A. degree of seventh respondent is awaited.

3. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent No.4 to look into petitioner's Legal Notice (Annexure P-10) while treating it to be a Representation and to hold a proper inquiry to find out as to whether seventh respondent is duly qualified and eligible to be appointed or not and as to how the marks in the interview given to seventh respondent are handwritten, whereas the marks given to other candidates in Annexure P- 2 are printed. Let respondent No.4 also verify as to how seventh respondent could obtain M.A. degree in Mathematics, which is a regular course, from Kalinga University, Raipur, Chhatisgarh while she was in regular service in a MCD school w.e.f. 16th October, 2014 to 8th May, 2015. Let a speaking order be passed on petitioner's Legal Notice/ Representation (Annexure P-10) within a period of twelve weeks and its fate be communicated to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedy, as available in law.

4. With aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

FEBRUARY 07, 2018/r