The Delhi School Education Act mandates private schools comply with government salary norms for employees, irrespective of financial status, reinforcing the principle of statutory obligation over hardship claims.

Headnote:(A) Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 - Section 10(1) - Writ petitions filed for payment of salaries per Seventh Central Pay Commission recommendations - Petitioners, being teachers, claimed salaries in line with government schools not paid by Respondent School despite provisions mandating compliance - Writs maintainable against private educational institutions for enforcing statutory obligations. (Paras 1, 2, 19, 26)

(B) Mandatory compliance - Section 10(1) mandates pay and allowances of recognized private schools to match those of government-run schools, including unaided institutions - Supreme Court rulings affirm that financial hardship cannot relieve the obligation to pay salaries as stipulated regardless of school management's financial condition. (Paras 10, 19, 35)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought pay increases per the 7th CPC recommendations, asserting that the Respondent School failed to implement these amid claims of financial hardship and non-application of Section 10(1) of the Act. (Paras 1, 2, 3)

Findings of Court:
The School is required to comply with Section 10(1) and is liable for any non-compliance, including de-recognition and actions against management per DSEA&R. (Paras 10, 39)

Issues: Applicability of Section 10(1) of the DSEA&R to unaided private schools and the validity of financial hardship as a defense against statutory obligations. (Paras 19, 39)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court clarifies that the provisions of Section 10(1) apply to all recognized private schools, including unaided ones, emphasizing statutory compliance over claims of financial constraints. (Paras 20, 39)

Result: Writ petitions allowed; the School directed to refix salaries under 7th CPC with arrears payable within six months. (Para 41)

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek salaries per 7th cpc (Para 1 , 2)
2. claims for salaries based on exact dues (Para 3 , 4)
3. legal basis for salary demands established (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. school argues against payroll requirements (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
5. doe emphasizes policy for wage parity (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
6. court's stance on petition maintainability (Para 15 , 16)
7. court's examination of section 10 applicability (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
8. historical context affirms section 10's relevance (Para 23 , 24)
9. decisions reaffirm section 10's scope (Para 25 , 26 , 27)
10. unambiguous duty of schools to comply (Para 28 , 29 , 30)
11. doe's mandate directs compliance obligation (Para 31 , 32 , 33)
12. financial constraints do not exempt compliance (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38)
13. court directs salary adjustment and timelines (Para 39 , 40 , 41)

JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the Respondent/School to pay salaries and other emoluments to them as per the recommendations of the Seventh Central Pay Commission, at par with their contemporaries in the Government and Government aided schools, invoking provisions of Section 10 (1) of Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `the DSEA &R'). Directions are also sought to the Director of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi to take action against the Respondent/School for not implementing its circulars and mandate of Section 10 (1) of DSEA &R. Since common questions of law and facts arise in all the above writ petitions, they are being taken up and decided by this common judgement. Managing Committee of Shri Sathya Sai Vidya Vihar/School is being referred to as `School' and the Director of Education is being referred to as `DOE' hereinafter, for the sake of convenience.

2. The brief facts germane for deciding the present writ petitions, including minor differences are as under:

a. Petitioners are Teachers employed with the School and their respective dates of appointments, etc., are set out hereinunder in a tabular form:

Sl. No.	Writ Petition	Name	Date of Appointment	Subject
1.	W.P.(C) 928/2019	Kuttamparampath Sudha Nair	02.07.2001	TGT (Science)
2.	W.P.(C) 929/2019	Rajeev Kumar Dhingra	12.07.2001	TGT (Phy.Ed.)
3.	W.P.(C) 932/2019	Poonam Sharma	10.07.1997	PGT (Maths)
4.	W.P.(C) 956/2019	Bibha Joshi Sharma	01.08.2003	TGT (English)

b. Pursuant to the recommendations of 7th CPC, Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2016 were notified and published on 25.07.2016 by Ministry of Finance, Government of India and given effect from 01.01.2016. Government of NCT of Delhi, vide Circular dated 17.10.2017, directed the private unaided recognised schools of Delhi to extend the benefits of the recommendations of 7th CPC as per mandate of Section 10 (1) of the DSEA &R to its employees, at par with the Government employees of corresponding status granted benefits under the Notification dated 25.07.2016.

c. Case set out by the Petitioners is that while other private schools extended the benefits of 7th CPC recommendations to its teachers and other employees, the management of Respondent School did not comply with the directions in the Circular dated 17.10.2017 and continues to pay salaries and allowances as per the recommendations of 6th CPC. Representation dated 29.11.2018 and a reminder thereto elicited no response. Constrained by the inaction of the school, Petitioners made a representation on 29.11.2018 to the DOE, complaining of non-payment of salaries and other dues, etc., under 7th CPC, followed by a reminder, but there was no response. Having left with no option, Petitioners approached this Court and moved the present petitions.

3. Ms. Indrani Ghosh, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that Petitioners are entitled to the benefits of salaries and other allowances such as Dearness Allowance, Bonus, DA Merger, etc., under the 7th CPC at par with employees of the corresponding