Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) No. 4839/2011 29th August , 2013 S.P.NAGRATH ......Petitioner
Through: Mr. A.P. Nagrath, Adv.
Through: Ms. Sonia Arora, Adv. for R-1.
Mr. Seraj Ahmad and Mr. N.A.Khan, Advocates. for R-2.
To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. In spite of repeated opportunities, respondent no.2-school has not filed counter-affidavit. On the last date of hearing i.e 5.4.2013, last opportunity was granted subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5000/-. Neither the costs have been paid nor the counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent no.2. Respondent no.1-Director of Education has filed its 2013:DHC:4258 counter-affidavit. I have therefore heard the counsel for the petitioner and am proceeding to dispose of the case.
2. Petitioner seeks the relief of benefit of ACP Scheme. Benefit is sought w.e.f 9.8.1999 and accordingly higher revised scale of pay. Petitioner has filed the DPC Minutes of Meeting dated 18.7.2009, which entitled the petitioner to grant of ACP benefits, however, the same was not granted because the school had filed a court case against the petitioner. This court case was a case whereby the school had claimed damages against the petitioner. This is the only reason which is mentioned by the DPC in the Minutes of Meeting dated 18.7.2009 for denying ACP benefits to the petitioner though simultaneously, it was stated that petitioner, alongwith 26 other persons, was entitled to the grant of ACP scheme benefits.
3. The Director of Education has filed an affidavit supporting the stand of the petitioner.
4. In view of the aforesaid position, it is clear that petitioner has been held entitled to ACP scheme benefits by the DPC conducted on 18.7.2009 and the only reason for denying him the benefit was pendency of a court case filed by the school against the petitioner. Since the case has been dismissed, even assuming that the court case is a valid handicap to deny the petitioner ACP benefits, that handicap no longer remains.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and it is ordered that petitioner will be granted the ACP benefits as per the recommendations of the DPC dated 18.7.2009. Necessary monetary emoluments be granted to the petitioner by the respondent no.2 in the proportion as required under law and within a period of two months from today. In case, the amount due is not paid within two months, petitioner will be entitled to interest at 9% per annum simple for the period after two months and till the petitioner is paid the requisite amount. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
AUGUST 29, 2013 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. ib