Savita Minocha Vs Director of Education and Ors.

¶1

$~15

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 9267/2025

¶4

SAVITA MINOCHA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Vivin Kumar Ahuja & Mr. Aviral Batra, Advocates.

¶6

versus DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, ASC with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Mr. Bhuwan Raj Seth, Ms. Vishruti Pandey and Ms. Arpita Goyal, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Abinash K. Mishra and M. Gaurav Kr. Pandey, Advocates for R 2 to 5.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

¶8

O R D E R % 04.11.2025

¶9

This petition is filed aggrieved of inaction of the respondent in deciding the representation dated 10.06.2022.

¶10

The brief facts are that the petitioner is working as TGT teacher with the respondent-school. The issue of stepping up the pay of the TGT teachers attained finality in favor of the teachers of Directorate of Education. The Supreme Court vide order dated 01.09.2017 in case titled as <Government of NCT and Delhi & Anr. Vs Somvir Rana (TGT Eng) & Ors.= passed the following order:

¶11

< Delay condoned.

¶12

We find that there are several matters in which the aggrieved employees have been going to the Tribunal, then to the High Court and thereafter those matters are brought

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/11/2025 at 13:03:59

¶15

before this Court at the instance of the Union of India/NCT of Delhi.

¶16

Once the question, in principle, has been settled, it is only appropriate on the part of the Government of India to issue a Circular so that it will save the time of the Court and the Administrative Departments apart from avoiding unnecessary and avoidable expenditure.

¶17

The present situation is that the stepping up is available only to those who have approached the Court. But since the issue has otherwise become final, we direct the Government of India to immediately look into the matter and issue appropriate orders for granting the pay-scale so that people need not unnecessarily travel either to the Tribunal or the High Court or this Court.

¶18

With the above observations and directions, the special leave petitions are dismissed.

¶19

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.=

¶20

In pursuance to the directions of the Supreme Court, the Government of NCT of Delhi issued order dated 22.05.2018, reproduced below:

¶21

< The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 01.09.2017 in SLP Diary No. 23663/2017 titled as Govt. of NCT of Delhi and another vs Somvir Rana and others, on the issue of refixation of pay of existing teachers not below the stage lower than the pay which could be drawn by a direct recruit appointee on or after 01.01.2006, had directed the Government of India to immediately look into the matter and issue appropriate orders for granting the pay scale of Rs.17140/-.

¶22

The Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, GOI, vide OM No. 8-5/2017-E.III(A) Dated 16.04.2018 has now ordered that all those TGTs who were appointed as such prior to or subsequent to 01.01.2006, their pay may be re-fixed at the level of entry pay applicable to TGTs appointed as DRs on or after 01.01.2006. The re-fixation of pay would take place on 01.01.2006 or the date of appointment as TGTs, whichever is later.

¶23

Now, therefore, in view of the above order, all

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/11/2025 at 13:03:59

¶26

HoS/DDEs are hereby directed to implement the said order for all similarly situated teachers working in this Directorate, the pay of all TGTs appointed on or before 01.01.2006 should be re-fixed accordingly.

¶27

This issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide U.O.No.31/Fin. (Estb-III)/2017/874 dated 14/05/2018 and prior approval of the Competent Authority.=

¶28

The petitioner filed representation dated 10.06.2022 to respondent no. 1 for implementation of the order dated 22.05.2018. The respondent no. 1 sought response of the respondent-school which was filed on 06.07.2022. The petitioner was given an opportunity by respondent no. 1 vide communication dated 20.10.2022 to respond to the reply filed by the respondent-school. Thereafter, the present petition has been filed.

¶29

The issue of implementation of order dated 22.05.2018 is pending before respondent no. 1 in representation filed by the petitioner. 6. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent no. 1 to decide the representation in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order after providing an opportunity to the affected parties.

¶30

Since the matter is relating to an order passed on 22.05.2018 an expeditious disposal shall highly be appreciated. The needful be done not later than three months from receipt of the certified copy of the order. 8. Needless to say that the parties shall be at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law if aggrieved of the decision.

¶31

NOVEMBER 4, 2025/ 8JK9

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/11/2025 at 13:03:59

Savita Minocha v. Director of Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savita Minocha v. Director of Education and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Godaver Singh Vs Dg Itbp and Anr.

Amit Katyal Vs Union of India through Seceratary Ministry of Finance & Anr.

Union of India & Ors. Vs 5850584 H Ex Rfn Ramesh Singh

M/S Mn Automobile Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Hari Om and Anr. Vs New-Delhi Muncipal Council and Ors.

Tarun Kumar Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Matrix Clothing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 16(2)NEW Delhi

Mr. Sunil Kumar Vs Labour Commissioner North District & Ors.

Smt Jyoti Vs Guru Nanak Eye Hospital , Eye Centre & Anr.

Atul Mohan Vs Punjab National Bank and Ors.

Harikrishan Semwal and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Dr. K K Chopra & Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ramesh Chand Bhatia @ R. C. Bhatia Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rajbala Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.