IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
Om Prakash & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Guru Nanak Institute of Management And Information Technology & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 8529 of 2017 and CM APPL.Nos.35084 of 2017, 32772 of 2018, 10712 of 2020, 31829 of 2020, 31873 of 2020, 1827 of 2021 and W.P.(C) 7881 of 2018 and CM APPL.Nos. 30201 of 2018, 10686 of 2020, 31828 of 2020, 31874 of 2020 and 1820 of 2021
Decided On : 15-03-2024
Salaries - Employees Grievances - Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee Act, 1971 - Section 32, Section 33 - The court held that the disputes between the petitioners and the respondents are subject to the jurisdiction of the District Judge under Section 32 of the Act. The court dismissed the writ petitions as non-maintainable due to the availability of an alternative and efficacious remedy under the Act. The court emphasized that the writ jurisdiction should not be invoked in cases of contractual disputes without a public law element. The court also highlighted that the alternative remedy must be exhausted before approaching the writ court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitions were filed by employees seeking relief such as quashing the orders of temporary lay-off, directions for payment of salaries, and reinstatement. The respondents are educational institutes functioning through Governing Bodies created and nominated by the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC). The employees' grievances include illegal withholding of salaries for several months.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitions were not maintainable as the disputes fell under the jurisdiction of the District Judge under Section 32 of the Act. The court emphasized that the existence of an alternative remedy was not a bar to filing the writ petitions. However, in this case, the court held that the alternative remedy must be exhausted before approaching the writ court.
Issues: The main issue was whether the instant batch of petitions was maintainable despite the availability of an alternative remedy under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the alternative remedy under Section 32 of the Act must be exhausted before approaching the writ court. The court emphasized that the writ jurisdiction should not be invoked in cases of contractual disputes without a public law element.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the instant batch of petitions as non-maintainable and granted the petitioners the liberty to approach the concerned District Court for redressal of their grievances.
JUDGMENT
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
1. The batch of petitions pertains to employees of respondent- Guru Nanak Institute of Management and Information Technology and the grievances of the employees alongwith their relief has been tabulated herein below:
| S.No | Writ Petition No. | Title of the writ petition | Petitioner's prayer | Petitioner's position |
| 1. | W.P.(C) No. 3034 OF 2023 | Kuljit Singh and Another Vs Guru Nanak Institute of Management and Information Technology and others | @BULLET=Writ Petition under article 226 for the issue of mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the arrears of salary to the tune of 40% from May 2020 to May 2021 | Petitioner No. 1, Mr.Kuljit Singh, has been appointed as a Accounts Clerk by Guru Hargobind Institute of Management and Information Technology (hereinafter referred to as GHIMIT). |
| 2. | W.P.(C) No. 3104 OF 2020 | Surinder Singh and Others Vs Guru Nanak Institute of Management and Information Technology and others | Writ petition filed by petitioner nos.1 to 27, working for respondent no. 1. Managed by respondent no.2 and approgved by respondent no.3. | Petitioner no. |
| 3. | W.P.(C) No. 3569 OF 2020 | Darshan Singh and Others Vs Guru Nanak Institute of Management and Information Technology and others | All the Petitioners herein are working with the Respondent No.1 Institute for the past more than 20-25 years; however, many of them continue to languish on the same post with the same remuneration on which they were initially appointed. Respondents herein, who have no regard to the rule of law have been illegally and unlawfully withholding the salaries of the Petitioners for several months, and at present, for the last more than 7 months (i.e. since December 2019). | 1. Mr. Darshan Singh, Field Work |
Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. C.P. Sebastian
Avtar Singh Hit Vs. Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee
Gurdeep Singh Dua Vs. Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee
K. Krishnamacharyulu v. Sri. Venkateshwara Hindu College of Engineering
Satpal Singh Vs. Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee & Anr.
Satwati Deswal Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.
Satimbla Sharma v. St. Pauls Senior Secondary School (2011) 13 SCC 760
The court affirmed that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy exists, particularly in private employment disputes.
Matter pertains to the internal affairs of an unaided Non-Government Educational Institution, a writ petition would not be maintainable against the unaided private Institution, as an alternative reme....
The Army Welfare Education Society is not a 'State' under Article 12, and the doctrine of legitimate expectation does not apply to private employment disputes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.