Delhi High Court
Komendra Prakash Gautam vs 1.Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, ... on 20 May, 2022
$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 20th May, 2022
+ W.P. (C)7864/2022
KOMENDRA PRAKASH GAUTAM ..... Petitioner
versus
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN, THROUG ITS
COMMISSIONER & ORS. ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Anukul Raj, Mr. Devesh Chauvia, Mr. Diwaker
Goel, Mr. Anubhav Deep Singh, Mr. Mukul Lather and
Mr. Shravan, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sushil K. Pandey, Advocate.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (Oral)
1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the Central Administrative Tribunal to
decide MA 3638/2021 and a further direction to respondents to pay
substantive allowances and salary from September, 2021 onwards.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner had filed an
Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal being OA
2108/2021, impugning the transfer order of petitioner from Mathura to
Signature Not Verified
Digital Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:23.05.2022 16:29:17
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
Lalitpur which, it is contended, is contrary to the guidelines by the
respondents themselves.
3. Learned counsel submits that as no interim protection was granted to
the petitioner, petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P. (C) 11469/2021,
which was decided on 06.10.2011, directing the respondents to maintain
status quo and further directing the Tribunal to take up the petition for
hearing on 25.10.2021.
4. He submits that till date the petition has not been disposed of and
petitioner is not being permitted to joint at the original place where the
petitioner was posted i.e., Mathura and no salary is being paid to the
petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for respondent submits that the status quo order
passed by this Court on 06.10.2021 was with the understanding that the
Tribunal shall dispose of the Original Application on 25.10.2021 itself. He
submits that as neither the Original Application nor the stay application
were taken up for consideration by the Tribunal on merits, respondents filed
a writ petition before this Court being W.P. (C) 2781/2022.
6. Learned counsel submits that by judgment dated 14.02.2022, W.P.
(C) 2781/2022 was disposed of directing the Tribunal to deal with, if not
the main matter, at least the interlocutory application on the next date i.e.,
14.02.2022 fixed before the Tribunal.
7. This Court had further directed that in case it was not possible to
Signature Not Verified
Digital Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:23.05.2022 16:29:17
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
take up the matter on the said date, Tribunal would endeavour to deal with
the matter within the next two weeks. Learned counsel submits that even as
on date neither the application nor the main petition has been taken up for
consideration and status quo is being extended from time to time.
8. Parties inform that petition is listed before the Tribunal on
31.05.2022 for final disposal.
9. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of directing the
Tribunal to dispose of the main petition on 31.05.2022 and if for any reason
it is not possible to dispose of the interim application on 31.05.2022. In
case it is not possible to dispose of the interim application on 31.05.2022,
the Tribunal shall take up the interim application on day-to-day basis till the
same is disposed of.
10. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented
upon the merits of the contentions of either party. All rights and
contentions of the parties are reserved.
11. Order dasti under signature of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
MAY 20, 2022/NA
Signature Not Verified
Digital Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:23.05.2022 16:29:17
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
