Full Text
$-27-29 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CONT.CAS(C)683/2013 & CM Appls. 14384, 19947/2015
G S VIRK Petitioner
Through:Mr.Chetan Anand,Adv.
Through: Mr.Jasmeet Singh,Adv.with Ms.Astha Sharma,Adv.
DALJIT KAUR Petitioner
Through: Mr.Nikhilesh Kumar with Mr.Ajay Kumar and Mr. Mohan Inder Singh,Advs.
Through:Mr.Jasmeet Singh,Adv.with Ms.Astha
SANDHYA GILL Petitioner
Through:Mr.J.K.Bhola,Adv.
Through:Mr.Jasmeet Singh,Adv.with Ms.Astha
18.11.2015 Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly stated that the two instalments dated 30^^ July, 2015 and 3V' October,2015 have been paid in accordance with the Division Bench order dated 22"^^ May, 2015 passed in EFA(OS)07/2014.
Mr. Jasmeet Singh, learned counsel for the respondents states that the aforesaid order as well as the order passed today by the
Division Bench shall be complied with in letter and spirit and the remaining three instalments shall also be paid on the date fixed.
The statement made by Mr. Jasmeet Singh is accepted by this
Court and the respondents are held bound by the same.
With the aforesaid observations, the present contempt petition is disposed of.
However,in the event,the aforesaid payments are not made on the date fixed,the petitioners shall be at liberty to seek revival ofthe present contempt proceedings. y
MANMOHAN,J NOVEMBER 18,2015 NG ^ OJ- (47-7fC cvv
^j'^1 i ) ft #8,15 to 20 $- 8.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CONT.CAS(C)46/2016& CM APPL.27315/2016
JASWANT KAUR Petitioner
Through Mr.Chetan Anand with Mr.Akash Shrivastava and Ms.Surbhi Vyas, Advocates
Through Mr.Jasmeet Singh with Ms.Gayatri, Aryan,Advocates for
GHPS/DSGMC.
SUKHDEEP SINGH & ORS
Through ..... Petitioners Mr.Chetan Anand with Mr. Akash Advocates
Through Mr.Jasmeet Singh with Ms.Gayatri, Mr.Rajiv Mehra,Sr. Standing
Counsel for Dept.ofEducation, AND 16.
GURDEEP KAUR& ORS Petitioners
Through Mr.Chetan Anand with Mr.Akash Advocates
Through Mr.JasmeetSingh with Ms.Gayatri,
G S VIRK Petitioner
Through None
AND
18.
CM APPLs.12444/2016,17414/2016 in CONT.CAS(C)670/2015
DALJIT KAUR Petitioner
Through None V r MANJIT SINGH& ANR Respondents
Through • Mr.JasmeetSingh with Ms.Gayatri, AND
19.
SANDHYA GILL Petitioner
Through Mr.ParamjeetSingh,Advocate
SHAMBHU NATHDAS Petitioner
Through Mr.Rajiv Tyagi,Advocate
ORDER
1. Mr. Jasmeet Singh, learned counsel for GHPS/DSGMC states that five instalmentshave been paid in accordance withthe DivisionBench order dated 22"^* May,2013 passed inEFA(OS)7/2014.
2. The only outstanding issue is whether TransportAllowance as wellas interesthasto be paid while calculatingthe SixthPay Commission arrears.
3. Mr.Jasmeet Singh,learned counsel for respondents states that while interestis payable,the TransportAllowance in notpayable.
4. Mr.Rajiv Tyagi,learned counsel for one ofthe petitioners states that Deamess Allowance on Transport Allowance is also payable in accordance with the SixthPay Commission.
5. However,in the opinion ofthis Court, Mr. Tyagi's claim would be payable only iftheTransportAllowance is payableinthefirstinstance.
6. Since there was a dispute whetherthe Transport Allowance is payable as a part ofthe Sixth Pay Commission,this Court had asked Directorate of Education to file an affidavit.
7. Today,Mr.Rahul Mehra,learned seniorstanding counselfor Govt.of NCT of Delhi has handed over a photocopy of the affidavit dated 6^ January,2017filed in Cont.Cas.(C)898/2016,which istaken on record. In the said affidavit,it has been stated as under:- "6. Further, asper the queries mentioned in para 3referred above by this Hon'ble Court, may like to request this Hon'ble Court that the answer to the above said queries may please be K
(i) Transport Allowance shall not be admissible to the n employees of Unaided Private Recognized Schools who have beenprovidedfreetransportfacility bytheschool.
(ii) As regard to the query, it is most respectfully submitted that the employees who have not been provided the transport facility by the school are entitled for the TransportAllowance. (Hi) As regard to this query, it is humbly submitted that the employees who are payingfor commuting to theirplace ofduty to the schoolfor using its transportfacility may be allowedthepaymentofTransportAllowance. '
8. Though both the petitioners and respondent-School are aggrieved by the decision ofthe Directorate ofEducation, yet this Court disposes ofthe present contempt petitions by directing the respondents, other than the Directorate of Education,to make payments ofthe transport allowance as well as interest in accordance with learned Single Judge s order dated 6 March, 2013 as well as in accordance with the aforesaid affidavit of Directorate ofEducation within a period oftwelve weeks.
9. It is clarified that if either of the parties wishes to challenge the decision of Directorate ofEducation with regard to transport allowance, it shall be at liberty to do so. The rights and contentions ofall parties are left open on that score.
10. With the aforesaid directions, present contempt petition stands disposed of. i II MANMOflAN,J