WPC 7168/2012 & conn.

Page 1 of 23

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) No. 7168/2012 & conn.

%

24^th October, 2013

+

W.P.(C) 7168/2012

VISHWA BHARTI PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS

..... Petitioners

Through:

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Shekhar Dasi

and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates.

versus

I NDER JEET SINGH AND ANR

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Mr. Ranjan

Kumar, Mr. Ratan Shukla, Mr.

Ashutesh Kr. Mishra and Mr. Pankaj

Tiwari, Advocates for R-1.

Mr. Kushal Yadav, Adv. for Ms.

Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-2/DOE.

+

W.P.(C) 7170/2012

VISHWA BHARTI PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS ..... Petitioners

Through:

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Shekhar Dasi

and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates

versus

INDU NEGI AND ANR

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Mr. Ranjan

Kumar, Mr. Ratan Shukla, Mr.

Ashutesh Kr. Mishra and Mr. Pankaj

Tiwari, Advocates for R-1.

2013:DHC:5463

WPC 7168/2012 & conn.

Page 2 of 23

Mr. Kushal Yadav, Adv. for Ms.

Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-2/DOE.

+

W.P.(C) 7171/2012

VISHWA BHARTI PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS

..... Petitioners

Through:

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Shekhar Dasi

and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates.

versus

DEEPTI POPLI AND ANR

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Mr. Ranjan

Kumar, Mr. Ratan Shukla, Mr.

Ashutesh Kr. Mishra and Mr. Pankaj

Tiwari, Advocates for R-1.

Mr. Kushal Yadav, Adv. for Ms.

Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-2/DOE.

+

W.P.(C) 7172/2012

VISHWA BHARTI PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS

..... Petitioners

Through:

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Shekhar Dasi

and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates.

versus

RITU KUMARI AND ANR

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Mr. Ranjan

Kumar, Mr. Ratan Shukla, Mr.

Ashutesh Kr. Mishra and Mr. Pankaj

Tiwari, Advocates for R-1.

Mr. Kushal Yadav, Adv. for Ms.

Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-2/DOE.

2013:DHC:5463

WPC 7168/2012 & conn.

Page 3 of 23

+

W.P.(C) 7173/2012

VISHWA BHARTI PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ORS

..... Petitioners

Through:

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Mr. Shekhar Dasi

and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates.

versus

VIRENDRA TIWARI AND ANR

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Pankaj Kr. Sinha, Mr. Ranjan

Kumar, Mr. Ratan Shukla, Mr.

Ashutesh Kr. Mishra and Mr. Pankaj

Tiwari, Advocates for R-1.

Mr. Kushal Yadav, Adv. for Ms.

Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-2/DOE.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1.

The facts of these cases are almost identical and therefore for

the sake of convenience reference will be made to the facts of W.P.(C)

No.7173/2012.

2.

Petitioner no.1-school along with its General Secretary and

Principal by this writ petition impugns the judgment of the Delhi School

Tribunal dated 25.4.2012. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal set aside

2013:DHC:5463

WPC 7168/2012 & conn.

Page 4 of 23

the communication dated 11.5.2011 issued by the petitioner no.1-school to

the respondent no.1 informing that the probationary period has not been

extended and the respondent no.1 stands relieved w.e.f 12.5.2011. Two

main reasons weighedwith the Tribunal for passing of the impugned

judgment. The first was that in the opinion of the Tribunal the Minutes of

Meeting of the Managing Committee dated 26.3.2011 were fabricated and

the second was that the probationary period as per Rule 105 of the Delhi

School Education Rules, 1973 should have been extended by one year, but it

was only extended for about 50 days. The termination of services of the

respondent no.1 were hence held to be illegal.

3.

The facts of the case are that respondent no.1 was appointed as

PGT(Mathematics) by the petitioner no.1-school on a probation period of

one year w.e.f 1.4.2010. The appointment letter appointing respondent no.1

on probation for one year is dated 31.3.2010. Paras 2 and 3 of the

appointment letter dated 31.3.2010 make it clear that confirmation will be

effected only from a date of written