Apeejay School v. Charu Lata Mata

Delhi High Court · 01 May 2025 · 2025:DHC:3241-DB

Navin Chawla; Mini Pushkarna

LPA 281/2025

2025:DHC:3241-DB

labor appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal of Apeejay School, upholding the order directing phased payment of statutory arrears under the 7th Central Pay Commission despite the school's financial constraints.

Full Text

LPA 281/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 01.05.2025

LPA 281/2025
APEEJAY SCHOOL, PITAMPURA .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Ralli & Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, Sr. Advs. along

WITH

Mr. Sumit Thakur, Mr. Chetanya Baweja & Mr. Praful Nawani, Advs.

VERSUS

CHARU LATA MATA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Nemo.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 26084/2025 (Exemption)

JUDGMENT

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. LPA 281/2025 & CM APPL. 26082/2025, CM APPL. 26083/2025

2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, challenging the Judgement dated 21.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.14428 of 2022, titled Charu Lata Matta v. Apeejay School & Anr., whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 herein was disposed of with the following direction:

“ 11. As far as the balance amount is

concerned, the directions are passed:

A. The school will compute the balance amount due to the petitioner with a period of six weeks from today. The computation will

incorporate the calculation of the amounts from 01.01.2016 to 31.03.2022, as well as the balance amount due after adjustment of the amount paid for the period 01.01.2016 to 31.03.2019.

B. Copies of the computation will be handed over to the petitioner, her counsel on record in this writ petition, and to the DoE.

C. Along with the computation, the School will also tender 25% of the balance amount, in accordance with its own computation, to the petitioner.

D. In the event the petitioner disputes the calculation, she may make a representation to the DoE in this regard within two weeks after the receipt of the calculation from the School. In such an eventuality, DoE is directed to examine the records submitted by both the parties, give them an opportunity of hearing and verify the balance amount due to the petitioner within a period of four weeks thereafter.

E. Subject to the aforesaid orders of the DoE, the School will pay the balance amount due to the petitioner in accordance with its own computation in three further monthly instalments of 25% each, i.e. the entire amount will be liquidated in four instalments, the first of which will be tendered along with the School's computation, and the other three at intervals of one month each thereafter.

F. In the event the DoE enhances the amount due to the petitioner, it will also give directions with regard to time within that payment must be made.”

3. The learned Senior Counsels appearing for the appellant submit that the appellant has already released the dues of the entire staff of the school as per the 7th Central Pay Commission (CPC) for the period from 01.01.2016 to 31.03.2019, and thereafter from 01.04.2022 till date. They submit that it is only due to financial constraints, that the appellant is unable to pay the dues for the interregnum period, that is, from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2022.

4. The learned senior counsels for the appellant further submit that in similar circumstances and on a similar issue, the Supreme Court by an Order dated 02.01.2024 passed a Special Leave Petition (SLP)(Civil) Diary No(s). 48722/2023 titled Greenfields Public School v. Anchla & Ors., directed the school therein to pay arrears of 25% as an Interim measure. They have also placed reliance on other interim orders passed by the learned Single Judges of this Court, the detailed reference of which is not necessary for the present order.

5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned senior counsels for the appellant.

6. As is evident from the above, the sole plea of the appellant is that considering the alleged financial constraints, the appellant should for the present be discharged from making the complete payment under the 7th CPC for the interregnum period or be directed to pay only a part thereof.

7. We are not impressed by the above submissions made by the learned senior counsels appearing on behalf of the appellants.

8. The learned Single Judge in the Impugned Order has already set instalments in which the admitted arrears under the 7th CPC have to be released by the appellant. These are statutory dues owed since 01.04.2019. Therefore, adequate relief has already been granted to the appellant and we see no reason to grant further relief on the same.

9. Accordingly, this appeal along with the pending application, is dismissed.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J MINI PUSHKARNA, J MAY 1, 2025/pr/my/DG Click here to check corrigendum, if any

Apeejay School v. Charu Lata Mata

AI Summary

Full Text

JUDGMENT

Contact Us for a Free Consultation