Delhi High Court
Master Yashvir Singh Chauhan And ... vs Bal Bharati Public School Rohini ... on 21 September, 2020
$~12.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 21st September, 2020
+ LPA 260/2020
MASTER YASHVIR SINGH CHAUHAN & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr.Khagesh B.Jha, Adv.
Versus
BAL BHARATI PUBLIC SCHOOL ROHINI & ORS ... Respondents
Through: Mr.Kamal Gupta, Adv. for R-1.
Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC with Ms.Dacchita
Shahi, Mr.Adithya Nair, Advs. for R-3/GNCTD.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
JUDGMENT
: D. N. PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral)
Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video
conferencing.
C.M.No.23361/2020 (exemptions)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
LPA 260/2020
1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original
petitioners being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the interim order
dated 7th September, 2020 (Annexure AA to the memo of this LPA) passed
by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 6053/2020, whereby the learned
Single Judge has made an arrangement to the effect that out of the total
outstanding amount, which is tentative in nature, 50% is required to be paid
by these petitioners.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:22.09.2020
16:58:56
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellants
(original petitioners) have paid school fees in excess of the amount legally
payable to the respondent no. 1/school management.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 1/School Management
submitted that they are charging the fee in accordance with law. He further
submitted that the arrears of school fee have already been mentioned in
paragraph 15 of the impugned order. This calculation of the arrears is as per
the respondent/School Management.
4. Thus, it appears that this LPA has been preferred against an interim
order passed by learned Single Judge whereby interim arrangement has been
made and the final amount of arrears and final amount of fees to be payable
per month is yet to be finally decided by the learned Single Judge.
5. For ready reference, paragraph 15 of the impugned order dated
7th September, 2020 in W.P.(C) 6053/2020, reads as under:
"15. I may only note that the learned senior counsel for
respondent No.1/School has pointed out that the
approximate outstanding dues of petitioner No.1 and
petitioner No. 2 are Rs.48,000/- each and the
approximate outstanding dues of petitioner No.3 are
Rs.16,000/-. For the time being, subject to further orders
of this court, let petitioners No.1 and 2 deposit a sum of
Rs.24,000/- each and petitioner No.3 deposit a sum of
Rs.8,000/- towards the arrears of the fee bills of the
petitioners. In case these amounts are deposited within
three weeks from today, no coercive steps shall be taken
by respondent No.1/School against the petitioners for the
alleged previous dues payable by the petitioners."
6. Thus, it appears that, as an interim relief, a via media has been found
by the learned Single Judge that till the final amount of arrears and final
amount of fees to be payable per month are decided in W.P.(C) 6053/2020,
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:22.09.2020
16:58:56
the appellants (original petitioners) have to deposit 50% of the total
outstanding amount claimed by the school management, i.e., ₹24,000/- each
for original petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and ₹8,000/- for original petitioner No.3
towards the arrears of the fee bills.
7. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the
order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find that a very reasonable and
balanced order has been passed by the learned Single Judge. We see no
reason to entertain this appeal as no error has been committed by the learned
Single Judge in balancing the interests of the parties by directing payment of
50% of the arrears/outstanding amount claimed by the school management.
8. Needless to say, the aforesaid deposits by these appellants (original
petitioners) shall be without prejudice to their rights and contentions, and the
observations in the impugned order are tentative in nature, only for the
purpose of the interim arrangement. The payment of any such amount will
not tantamount to any admission by these appellants (original petitioners).
9. In view of the above, we see no reason to interfere with the interim
order of the learned Single Judge, passed in a pending writ petition and
accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with the above observations.
CHIEF JUSTICE
PRATEEK JALAN, J
SEPTEMBER 21, 2020/„anb‟
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ
KUMAR
Location:
Signing Date:22.09.2020
16:58:56
