2023/DHC/000737

$~24

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of decision: 31^st January, 2023

+

W.P.(C) 6486/2021

PIYUSH MITTAL

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Sandeep, Advocate.

versus

NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION

..... Respondent

Through:

Mr. Manu Chaturvedi, SC for MCD.

Mr. Sunil Kapoor, Advocate for R-2.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner - Mr. Piyush

Mittal against the Respondent No.1 - North Delhi Municipal Corporation

(NDMC) and his wife i.e., Respondent No. 2 - Ms. Shilpi Mittal seeking a

vigilance enquiry against the Respondent No. 2.

3. The present is a classic case wherein a matrimonial dispute between a

couple has resulted in a completely tangential proceeding being pursued by

the Petitioner/husband to jeopardise and cause damage to his wife’s

employment.

4. The case of the Petitioner is that the Respondent No. 2 and the

Petitioner married on 5th May, 2013. At that time Respondent No. 2 was

working with the Respondent No.1 as a primary teacher on contract basis.

She became a permanent employee in September, 2015. According to the

Petitioner, she was able to get this job due to her uncle who was working as

Principal in Adarsh Nagar, MCD School in the evening shift. In 2016,

Digitally Signed

By:DEVANSHU JOSHI

Signing Date:02.02.2023

15:47:06

Signature Not Verified

2023/DHC/000737

Respondent No. 2 left the matrimonial home and disputes ensued between

the parties.

5. According to the Petitioner, Respondent No.2 had attended various

Court proceedings before the Rohini District Courts, the High Court, before

other authorities such as CAW Cell, DHC Mediation Cell, etc. The

Petitioner, has obtained the order sheets of these proceedings which would

show that Respondent No.2 had remained absent from school on several

dates only to attend the proceedings before the various authorities. It is his

case that he has also obtained the CDR and location chart of the mobile

numbers of the Respondent No.2 and her Uncle by moving an application

before the Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Rohini. The said CDR and

location chart shows presence of Respondent No.2 and her Uncle in the

Courts during the working hours of the Respondent No. 2’s school.

6. As per the Petitioner, in view of the fact that Respondent No. 2 has

been absenting herself from school and continues to receive salary he filed

written complaints dated 26^th August 2019 and 2^nd September 2019, to the

Respondent No.1 pursuant to which a show-cause notice was issued to the

Respondent No. 2 on 9^th September, 2019. The said complaint continued to

remain pending and was sent to the legal department of Respondent No.1.

7. The matter had to be referred to the vigilance department for enquiry,

however, such an enquiry was not initiated, hence the present petition has

been filed seeking directions against the Respondent No.1 to commence a

vigilance enquiry against Respondent No.2. The reliefs prayed for are as

under:

Digitally Signed

By:DEVANSHU JOSHI

Signing Date:02.02.2023

15:47:06

Signature Not Verified

2023/DHC/000737

interest of justice.”

8. Notice was issued in this petition on 14^th July, 2021.

9. The Respondent No.2 who was initially not impleaded was, thereafter,

impleaded by the Petitioner. The counter affidavit has also been filed by the

Respondent No.1 in the meantime.

10. As per the counter affidavit of the Respondent No.1, upon legal

advice given by the concerned DLO Vigilance, the Respondent No.1 was

advised to conduct investigation at the department level, accordingly a

department level investigation was conducted and vide action taken report

dated 18^th January, 2023 it was found that the Respondent No.2 was not

guilty or a defaulter. Thus, ld. Counsel for the Respondent No.1 submits that

the present writ petition oug