REKHA SHARMA, J.

The petitioner was a Chemistry teacher in Delhi Public School. She attained the age of 60 years on July 31, 2010. It is not disputed that her age of retirement was 60 years. Her grievance is that a Notification dated January 29, 2007 was issued by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, Directorate of Education (in short, referred to as “GNCTD”) allowing re-employment to all retiring teachers upto PGT level till they attain the age of 62 years and that despite the Notification, she has not been granted the benefit of re-employment without any cogent reason.

Before I proceed further, let me reproduce the Notification. It runs as under:-

“GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION, OLD SECRETARIAT, DELHI.

No.F.30-3(28)/Co-Ord/2006/686-753 Dated: 29th January, 2007 NOTIFICATION

In pursuance to Cabinet Decision No.113, dt.4.9.2006 conveyed vide letter No.F.3/3/2004-GAD/CN/20491-502, dt. 8.9.2006, the Lieutenant Governor, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi is pleased to allow automatic re-employment of all retiring teachers upto PGT level, subject to fitness and vigilance clearance, till they attain the age of 62 years or till clearance from Government of India for extending retirement age is received, whichever is earlier. The terms and conditions of re-employment are being notified separately.

By order and in the name of The Lt. Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi

Sd/-

(MADHUP VYAS)

Joint Secretary (Education)”

In furtherance to the Notification dated January 29, 2007, the GNCTD issued another Notification dated February 28, 2007 laying down instructions/guidelines for re-employment. The following paragraph of this Notification is relevant.

“x x x x x

1. The retiring teachers of the Directorate of Education, GNCT of Delhi, shall be eligible for consideration for re-employment against clear vacancy upto his/her attaining the age of 62 years. The re-employment will be subject to fitness and vigilance clearance of the retiring teachers, i.e. the pensioner. For physical fitness of retiring teacher, a certificate from authorized medical practitioner is required to be submitted to the Head of School, where the retiring teacher has last served. The professional fitness is required to be assessed by DDE of the concerned District after considering work and conduct report, vigilance clearance and medical certificate submitted by the pensioner. The DDE concerned will ensure that the teachers, who are free from vigilance angle, are only re-employed and individual teacher should not be made to run around to get the vigilance clearance...”

While the petitioner has relied upon the aforesaid Notification of January 29, 2007, respondent No.2, namely, the Managing Committee of the School has taken the stand that the Notification so relied upon by her does not apply to private unaided Schools and that as respondent No.2 is also a private unaided School, it is not covered by the Notification. It may be noted that respondent No.1, namely, Director of Education in its counter-affidavit to the writ-petition has endorsed the said stand of respondent No.2. It says that the Notification dated January 29, 2007 regarding re-employment is meant for teachers upto PGT level in Government and Government aided Schools and is not applicable to unaided Public Schools. It further says that the re-employment is subject to conditions as specified in the Notification, like, medical fitness and performance before the retirement and that the competent authority in the case of Public Schools is the Managing Committee which has to take final decision in the matter of re-employment.

It is not that respondent No.2 did not consider the case of the petitioner for re-employment up to the age of 62 years, but it was done not on the basis of the Notification dated January 29, 2007 but on the basis of a decision of the Working Committee of the Delhi Public School