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

DELHI HIGH COURT
MRS. NIDHI BATRA – Appellant
Versus
DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS. – Respondent
W.P.(C)-6656/2022



Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/000014

Page 1 of 16

$~26

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) 6656/2022 & C.M. APPL. 20198/2022

MRS. NIDHI BATRA

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Rajat Rathee, Advocate.

versus

DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS...... Respondents

Through:

Ms. Pragya Goyal, Advocate

for Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, Advocate for

R-1/DOE.

Mr. Vivek Kumar Tandon, Ms. Rinku

Tiwary and Ms. Prerna Tandon, Advocates

for R-2 and R-3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1.

Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking the

following reliefs:

Digitally Signed

By:KAMAL KUMAR

Signing Date:03.02.2023

19:13:29

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/000014

Page 2 of 16

iv. Allow the present writ petition of the petitioner with cost.

2.

Facts relevant to the adjudication of the issues that arise in the

present writ petition are in a narrow compass. Petitioner joined the

Lions Public School (hereinafter referred to as the School)/

Respondents No. 2 and 3, as PGT (Maths) on 06.07.2007. Aggrieved

by non-payment of the revised salary and allowances under the 6th

Central Pay Commission (CPC), Petitioner along with other teaching

staff of the School preferred Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1753/2015

before this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing Respondent

No. 1/Directorate of Education (DOE) to ensure compliance of its

order dated 11.02.2009 for disbursement of benefits under the 6th

CPC. Matter was amicably settled and a Memorandum of Settlement

was entered into between the Petitioners therein and the School

whereby the School agreed to disburse the revised salaries in

accordance with the recommendations of the 6th CPC and the writ

petition was withdrawn on 15.03.2016.

3.

Pursuant to the recommendations of 7th CPC, DOE issued an

Order dated 17.10.2017, directing private unaided schools to pay

salaries and allowances to their employees in accordance with Section

10 (1) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to

as the Act) after giving benefit of the pay revision under 7th CPC.

Several complaints were made by the employees of the School to

DOE on account of non-payment of salaries and emoluments under

the 7th CPC but to no avail, compelling the Petitioner to approach this

Court.

4.

Grievances of the Petitioner in the present writ petition relate to

non-payment of salary and emoluments in accordance with the

Digitally Signed

By:KAMAL KUMAR

Signing Date:03.02.2023

19:13:29

Signature Not Verified

Neutral Citation Number: 2023/DHC/000014

Page 3 of 16

recommendations of 7th CPC embodied in CCS (Revised Pay) Rules,

2016, including arrears thereof as well as payment of only 40% to

50% of the actual salary in 2022. Additionally, Petitioner also seeks

payment of allowances such as DA, TA, LTC, Bonus, Medical

Allowance etc.

5.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the reliefs

sought by the Petitioner in the present writ petition pertaining to

payment of salary and allowances under the 7th CPC deserve to be

granted as her case is squarely covered by the judgments of this Court

in Sadhna Payal & Ors. v. Director of Education and Anr., 2010

SCC OnLine Del 80; Shikha Sharma v. Guru Harkrishan Public

School

and

Others,

2021

SCC

OnLine

Del

5011

and

Kuttamparampath Sudha Nair v. Managing Committee, Sri Sathya

Sai Vidya Vihar and Another, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 2511. The

School is under a statutory obligation to revise the pay of the

Petitioner by virtue of Section 10(1) of the Act and can raise no

defence to escape the said liability. It is also submitted that the only

ground urged by the School to deny the benefits to the Petitioner is the

alleged financial crisis and paucity of funds, which is untenable in law

and this contention has been negatived by this Court in the various

judgments, aforementioned.

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 Back to top