Delhi High Court
Vidya Sagar Barnwal & Anr. vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 11 March, 2022
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 11.03.2022
+ W.P.(C) 4149/2022
VIDYA SAGAR BARNWAL & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr Harpreet Singh and Mr Arunesh
Sharma, Advocates
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ... Respondents
Through: Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
for Mrs Avnish Ahlawat, Standing
Counsel, GNCTD with Mrs Tania
Ahlawat, and Mr Siddhant Tyagi,
Advocates for DOE.
Mr Thehak, Nakra, ASC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
[Physical Hearing/ Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL):-
CM APPL. 12420/2022
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 4149/2022 & CM APPL. 12419/2022[Application filed on behalf
of the petitioners seeking interim relief]
2. Issue notice.
2.1. Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
2.2. Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh states that he does not wish to file a counter-
affidavit, and would argue the matter based on the record presently available
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:AMIT ARORA
Signing Date:16.03.2022
11:42:17
with the court.
3. Accordingly, with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the writ
petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
4. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 16.02.2022,
passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short, "the Tribunal"] in
O.A. No. 365/2022. The Tribunal, via the said order, has dismissed the O.A.
preferred by the petitioners.
4.1. The record reveals that the petitioners had been engaged as Guest
Teachers, in the capacity of Trained Graduate Teacher (Sanskrit) [in short
"TGT (Sanskrit)"].
4.2. We are told that petitioner no.1 worked as Guest Teacher between
13.09.2013 and 08.05.2014. Likewise, petitioner no. 2 was engaged as Guest
Teacher between 26.10.2012 and 10.05.2013, as also between 15/18.09.2013
and 10.05.2014.
4.3. Mr Harpreet Singh, who appears on behalf of the petitioners, says that
the Tribunal failed to appreciate the frame of the petitioners' action.
4.4. In this context, our attention has been drawn by Mr Harpreet Singh to
the prayers made in the O.A. For the sake of convenience, the substantive
prayers made in the O.A. are extracted hereafter :
"i. Direct the respondents to unblock the ID of the
applicants;
ii. Consequent to (i) above, direct the respondents to
consider the applicants for re-allocation of school in terms
of circular dated 17.06.2021 and appoint them as Guest
Teacher at the post of TGT (Sanskrit)if otherwise found
eligible."
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:AMIT ARORA
Signing Date:16.03.2022
11:42:17
5. Mr Harpreet Singh says that since the IDs of the petitioners remained
blocked, they could not convey their willingness for re-appointment as
Guest Teachers.
5.1. To our query as to why the petitioners had approached the Tribunal
after a lapse of nearly 7 years, Mr Harpreet Singh has drawn our attention to
Annexure-A/4, appended on page 67 of the case file. This is an order dated
21.10.2021, passed by the Directorate of Education (DOE). In particular, Mr
Harpreet Singh has highlighted the relevant facts concerning the
appointment of persons, whose names are given against serial nos. 69 to 76,
143, 145, 147, 149, 152, 154, 158, 159, 161 and 162 to demonstrate that
although these persons who had been relieved as far back as in 2014 (and
even earlier), had been engaged, once again, as Guest Teachers as recently
as October 2021.
5.2. Furthermore, Mr Harpreet Singh states that a perusal of the details
given in the aforementioned document would show that some of these
persons had clocked lesser number of days than what the petitioners spent as
Guest Teachers.
6. Given this position, we have put to Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh as to
whether the respondents would be in a position to unblock the IDs of the
petitioners, and consider them for engagement as Guest Teachers, in
accordance with the extant scheme.
6.1. Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh, on instructions, says that the petitioners' IDs
will be unblocked, and they will be considered for the posts of Guest
Teachers, as per their eligibility, in accordance with the extant scheme.
6.2. The statement of Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh is taken on record.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:AMIT ARORA
Signing Date:16.03.2022
11:42:17
7. Mr Harpreet Singh says that he is satisfied with the position taken by
the respondents.
8. In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of, in terms of the
statement of Mr Nitesh Kumar Singh.
8.1. Resultantly, the impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside.
8.2. Needless to add, the respondents will act with due alacrity and
endeavour to carry out the aforementioned exercise within a reasonable
timeframe, though not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgement.
9. Parties will act, based on the digitally signed copy of the judgement.
10. Consequently, pending applications shall stand closed.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
JASMEET SINGH, J
MARCH 11, 2022/sr
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:AMIT ARORA
Signing Date:16.03.2022
11:42:17
