Dismissed

Rajdeep Singh & Ors. v. Balesh Kumari Vijayrun

Delhi HC18 Aug 2026CONT.CAS(C)/629/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners alleged wilful disobedience regarding arrears and retiral benefits. The Court noted respondents had discharged their liability via a compliance affidavit confirming full payment. Petitioners admitted receiving amounts but claimed coercion and calculation errors. The Court held that unsatisfied petitioners must challenge the earlier calculation order via appropriate legal remedies, thus

What did the court decide?

No relief was granted; the petition was disposed of as the petitioners were advised to challenge the earlier order via appropriate legal remedies.

Rajdeep Singh & Ors. Vs Balesh Kumari Vijayrun — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CNR No. DLHC010231462025

¶4

% Date of Decision: 18^th August, 2026

¶5

- CONT.CAS(C) 629/2025 & CM APPL. 49817/2026

¶6

RAJDEEP SINGH & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Manas Verma, Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Mr. Lovekesh, Ms. Anjali, Ms. Kritika Matta, Ms. Bhumica Kundra, Advocates (M:9315170470)

¶7

versus

¶8

BALESH KUMARI VIJAYRUN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Gaurav Dhingra, Mr. Shashank Singh, Advocates for R-1 (M:9873475990) Mr. Vivek Kumar Tandon, Ms. Laxmi Gupta, Ms. Pooja Giri, Advocates for R-2 & 3 (M:9810277733)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶11

MINI PUSHKARNA, J (ORAL):

¶12

The present petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 23^rd December, 2024, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 6542/2022 . Vide the aforesaid order directions had been issued in the following manner:

¶13

“xxx xxx xxx

¶14

9. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of holding that Petitioners are entitled to pay revisions as per the pay matrix under 7^th CPC with effect from 01.01.2016. Director of Education is directed to nominate the Deputy Director of the

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 3.08.2026 10:24:19

¶18

concerned zone to carry out the exercise of working out the arrears due to the Petitioners on pay revision. For this purpose, the concerned officer so nominated will hold a meeting between the representative of the Petitioners and the School and call for their respective calculations. Date, time and venue for the personal hearing shall be intimated to the concerned parties, in writing, well in advance. For the purpose of calculation, if necessary, assistance can be taken of a Chartered Accountant, for which the expenses will be borne by the School. After hearing the parties, a report shall be furnished to the respective sides indicating the amounts due to the Petitioners. School shall release the arrears in terms of the report submitted by the Deputy Director concerned.

¶19

10. It is directed that the entire exercise shall be completed by the concerned officer within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The amounts so calculated will be disbursed by the School to the Petitioners in six equal instalments beginning from the date of the report. Needless to state that if in the meantime any of the Petitioners have retired, the retiral benefits will be released on the basis of the revised pay. Insofar as Petitioner No.2 is concerned, at this stage, arrears will be released upto the date of her termination and subject to the outcome of the challenge to the termination order for further arrears. In case of any surviving grievance, it would be open to the Petitioners and the School to take recourse to appropriate legal action.

¶20

xxx xxx xxx”

¶21

This Court notes that vide order dated 04^th August, 2026, passed in the present proceedings, it had been recorded as under:

¶22

“1. None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called out.

¶23

2. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 puts in appearance.

¶24

3. He submits that Compliance Affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, as per which, full payment has already been made to the petitioner.

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 3.08.2026 10:24:19

¶28

4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1, i.e., Directorate of Education also puts in appearance and confirms the fact that as per the information given by respondent nos. 2 and 3, full amount already stands paid to the petitioner.

¶29

5. Pursuant to the directions by this Court, respondent nos. 2 and 3 are present before this Court through Video Conferencing (“VC”).

¶30

6. Considering the Compliance Affidavit filed before this Court, the presence of respondent nos. 2 and 3 is exempted.

¶31

7. Since none appears for the petitioner for passing requisite orders, re-notify on 18th August, 2026, in the Top Ten Matters in the Advance List.”

¶32

Furthermore, this Court notes that pursuant to the order dated 23^rd December, 2024, the petitioners as well as the respondent nos. 2 and 3, i.e., Lions Public School, were called by respondent no.1, i.e., the Directorate of Education (“DoE”) for personal hearing.

¶33

Pursuant to the said hearing, an order dated 20^th May, 2025, had been issued by the Office of the Deputy Director of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi (“GNCTD”), Zone-11, District North-West B-I, FU Block Pitampura, New Delhi-110034, wherein, calculations have been made by the DoE as per the recommendation of the 7^th Central Pay Commission (“7^th CPC”) effectuated from 01^st January, 2016, and as per the service records made available by the School as on 31^st December, 2015.

¶34

It is to be noted that on the basis of the aforesaid order dated 20^th May, 2025, the requisite amounts were released by the respondents-school to the petitioners.

¶35

Learned counsel for the respondents-schools submits that as per the calculations of the DoE, all the amounts have already been released to the petitioners.

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Page 3 of 4

¶38

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 3.08.2026 10:24:19

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioners confirms the fact that the amounts in terms of the said order dated 20^th May, 2025 passed by the DoE, have been received by the petitioners.

¶40

However, he submits that retiral dues have still not been given to the petitioners.

¶41

He further submits that the calculations done by the DoE vide order dated 20^th May, 2025, are fallacious and are not as per the recommendations of the 7^th CPC.

¶42

However, it is to be noted that the petitioners have already accepted the full amounts in terms of the order dated 20^th May, 2025, passed by the DoE.

¶43

This Court notes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners that the calculations of the DoE were accepted by the petitioners under coercion.

¶44

If that be the case, wherein the petitioners are not satisfied with the calculations made by the DoE, and if as per the petitioners, there are further amounts due and payable to them, then they are at liberty to seek their remedies, in accordance with law, including challenging the order dated 20^th May, 2025, issued by the DoE.

¶45

Accordingly, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition.

¶46

The present petition, along with pending application, is accordingly, disposed of.

¶47

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶48

AUGUST 18, 2026 / au

¶49

Signature Not Verified

¶50

Page 4 of 4

¶51

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:2 3.08.2026 10:24:19

Rajdeep Singh & Ors. v. Balesh Kumari Vijayrun

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajdeep Singh & Ors. v. Balesh Kumari Vijayrun

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

Vijay Kumar & Ors. Vs Sh Atis Chandra & Ors.

Dhananjay Rathi Vs Ruchika Rathi

Pooja Khanna Vs Dr Rajiv Mani Secretary Department of Legal Affairs & Anr.

Pasupati Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. Vs Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited

Rajeev Jain & Anr. Vs Gulshan Kumar Jain through Lr Deepak Jain

Late Sh. Darshan Singh (Deceased) His Lr Mrs. Balbir Kaur & Ors. Vs Vanita Arora

Surinder Singh Tirath Singh Chandhok Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited and Ors.

Kapil Bhardwaj Vs Sanjeev Khirwar