Allowed

Rani & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC11 May 2016W.P.(C)/8541/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order concludes a writ petition filed by part-time Punjabi teachers. The court accepted that the petitioners were identically placed with parties in a similar earlier case regarding Urdu teachers. Following the previous judgment, the court directed the Director of Education to ensure salary compliance under the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, attaching a note for Cabinet consideration.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with directions identical to WP(C) No.13296/2009 for the Director of Education to examine the claim for salary arrears under Rule 101 of the Delhi School Education Rul

Rani & Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 8541/2014

¶4

RANI & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Bharat Bhushan Bhatia, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Kuma Singh, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Adv. for NDMC. Mr. Jayendra, Adv. for R-5.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

¶8

O R D E R % 11.05.2016

¶9

The petitioners have restricted their prayer to the relief granted in WP(C) No.13296/2009 titled Durraj Fatima Naqvi and Ors. vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. vide judgment dated 17.9.2010. The relevant operative portion of this order reads:

¶10

“17. We dispose of the writ petitions issuing a mandamus to the respondents to release the salary due and payable to the petitioners with reference to the mandate of Rule 101 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 and as explained by us herein above. Noting that the petitioners raise the claim when they filed writ petitions in this Court in the year 2000 which were transferred for adjudication to the Tribunal, we direct that arrears would be paid with effect from 1.1.2000 and the same would be calculated by determining the wages payable as per Rule 101 of the Delhi School Education

¶11

Rules 1973 with reference to the pay scales applicable to the regularly appointed teachers and the entitlement of the petitioners would be 50% of the wages payable. Since the Director of Education is charged with the statutory duty of ensuring compliance with the provisions of the Delhi School Education Rules 1973 and the rules framed there-under our mandamus is directed to the Director of Education to ensure compliance not only pertaining to the Government Schools directly under his control but even the Municipal Schools.”

¶12

It is accepted that the petitioners herein are identically placed. Durraj Fatima Naqvi (supra) was filed by part-time Urdu teachers and the present petition is by part-time Punjabi teachers. Part-time Sanskrit teachers have been also granted relief.

¶13

Counsel appearing for the Government of NCT of Delhi has stated that this is factually correct and a note for identical relief has been put up and is pending consideration before the Cabinet of the Government of NCT of Delhi.

¶14

As there is no dispute that the petitioners herein are identically and similarly placed as petitioners in Durraj Fatima Naqvi (supra), we are inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the same directions as were issued in the said case. The claim of the petitioners would be examined by the Director of Education who has the statutory duty to ensure compliance with the provisions of Delhi School Education Rules, 1973. The aforequoted paragraph and directions given therein would equally apply in the case of the petitioners and necessary compliance will be made by the respondents.

¶15

With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is

disposed of.

SANJIV KHANNA, J

NAJMI WAZIRI, J

MAY 11, 2016/ak

Rani & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rani & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Nagpal & Anr. Vs UOI & Ors.

Dashrath Singh Vs Andhra Bank & Ors.

Alpha Infravision Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Shashi Ranjan Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Umesh Ray Vs Union of India & Ors.

Jaidal Singh Rawat Vs Food Corporation of India & or

Mohd. Salim Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

Devender Singh Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Pankaj Sanghi Vs Lt. Governor, Delhi & Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Sandip Kumar Roy and Ors.

Ram Awatar Verma Vs Union of India & Anr.

Ravi Kumar Vs Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr.

Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs Rajesh Kumar

Archana Agarwal Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.