SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 1995

JYOTI SINGH
Rajeev Kumar Dhingra – Appellant
Versus
Managing Committee Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vihar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Ms. Indrani Ghosh, Advocate, for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 2362 of 2022 & CM APPL. 56169 of 2022, 56444 of 2022, W.P.(C) 2363 of 2022& CM APPL. 56443 of 2022 & W.P.(C) 2427/2022 & CM APPL. 56226/2022, 56442/2022 & W.P.(C) 2428/2022 & CM APPL. 56089/2022, 56445/2022.
Mr. Anurag Lakhotia and Mr. Udit Dwivedi, Advocates, for the Respondent-1 in W.P.(C) 2362 of 2022 & CM APPL. 56169 of 2022, 56444 of 2022, W.P.(C) 2363 of 2022& CM APPL. 56443 of 2022 & W.P.(C) 2427/2022 & CM APPL. 56226/2022, 56442/2022 & W.P.(C) 2428/2022 & CM APPL. 56089/2022, 56445/2022.
Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Addl. Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi and Ms. Manisha, Advocates, for the DOE in W.P.(C) 2362 of 2022 & CM APPL. 56169 of 2022, 56444 of 2022.
Mr. Gaurav Dhingra, Advocate, for the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) 2363/2022& CM APPL. 56443/2022.
Ms. Latika Chaudhary, Advocate, for the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) 2427/2022 & CM APPL. 56226/2022, 56442/2022.
Mr. V. Balaji and Mr. C. Kannan, Advocates, for the Respondent No.2 in W.P.(C) 2428/2022 & CM APPL. 56089/2022, 56445/2022.

JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. Present writ petitions have been filed by the Petitioners seeking directions to Respondent No.1/Managing Committee, Sri Sathya Sai Vidya Vihar (hereinafter referred to as the `School') for correct fixation of the salaries and other allowances of the Petitioners in accordance with the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, (hereinafter referred to as the `Rules 2008'), issued in exercise of powers conferred by Proviso to Article 309 and Clause (5) of Article 148 of the Constitution of India, pursuant to the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), effective from 01.01.2006. On account of the similitude of the legal issues arising in the four petitions, they were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. The facts germane for deciding the present writ petitions are in a narrow compass. Petitioners are Teachers employed with the School and their respective dates of appointments, etc. are set out hereunder:

Sl. No.Writ PetitionNameDate of AppointmentSubject
1.W.P.(C) 2362/2022Rajeev Kumar Dhingra12.07.2001TGT (Physical Education)
2.W.P.(C) 2363/2022Kuttamparampath Sudha Nair02.07.2001TGT (Science)
3.W.P.(C) 2427/2022Bibha Joshi Sharma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top