Pradeep Kumar Gupta v. Directorate of Education & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 13 Dec 2023 · 2023:DHC:8950-DB

V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta

W.P.(C) 13942/2023

2023:DHC:8950-DB

administrative petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted the petitioner liberty to urge the plea of back wages before the Tribunal in fresh proceedings, ensuring parity with a similarly situated co-applicant.

Full Text

W.P.(C) 13942/2023
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: December 13, 2023

W.P.(C) 13942/2023
PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aunj Aggarwal, Advocate.

VERSUS

DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Mrs. Tania Ahlawat, Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advocates.
Mr. Yeeshu Jain, ASC with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi Ms. Manisha and Mr. Hitanshu, Advocates, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)

JUDGMENT

1. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated April 12, 2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal („Tribunal‟, in short), Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 3777/2016 titled as Pradeep Kumar Gupta & Anr. Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. The said OA was filed by two applicants namely Pradeep Kumar Gupta and Mahesh Chand Gupta.

2. It is noted that Mahesh Chand Gupta has filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) 14310/2023. The same was disposed of on November 03, 2023 by this court in terms of the following order:

“2. The only grievance of the petitioner as has been urged by Mr.Aggarwal is that the Tribunal should not have confined the re-examination of the petitioner for re- engagement as a Guest Teacher prospectively. He submits that the petitioner’s services having been disengaged in the year 2016, the petitioner was within his right to seek back wages till the date of disengagement. He concedes to the fact that the petitioner has challenged the order which has now been passed by the respondents pursuant to the impugned order of the Tribunal dated April 12, 2023. According to him, in view of the observation of the Tribunal in paragraph 13, he shall be barred from seeking back wages from the year 2016 before the Tribunal in the fresh proceedings initiated by the petitioner. 3. We say nothing on the submission made by Mr.Aggarwal except granting liberty to the petitioner to urge before the Tribunal, in the fresh proceedings initiated by him the plea of back wages. It is for the Tribunal to consider the plea of back wages in accordance with law. 4. Petition is disposed of.”

3. Mr. Aggarwal states, similar liberty as was granted to Mahesh Chand Gupta be extended to the petitioner herein, who has also challenged the order now passed by the respondents.

4. We are of the view that since the writ petition arises from an order passed in OA filed by the petitioner herein and the petitioner in W.P.(C) 14310/2023, the petitioner herein is also entitled to parity and accordingly, we make it clear that liberty as granted to the petitioner in W.P.(C) 14310/2023 shall be available to the petitioner herein to urge before the Tribunal in the fresh proceedings initiated by the petitioner, the plea of back-wages and the Tribunal shall consider the same in accordance with law.

5. With the above, the petition is disposed of.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J. DECEMBER 13, 2023

Pradeep Kumar Gupta v. Directorate of Education & Anr.

AI Summary

Full Text

JUDGMENT

Contact Us for a Free Consultation