Presiding Officer Delhi School Tribunal v. Govt of NCT of Delhi (Through Its Chief Secretary)

MANMOHAN,J.

MUKTA GUPTA, J. AUGUST 27, 2010 vk

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 27th August, 2010 + O. REF. 1/2010 PRESIDING OFFICER DELHI SCHOOL TRIBUNAL ..... Petitioner Through Ms. Rekha Palli, Amicus Curiae. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI (THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY) ..... Respondent Through Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1. Whether reporters of the local papers be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes DIPAK MISRA, CJ The present reference under Section 113 read with Order XLVI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was made by the Presiding Officer, Delhi School Tribunal (for short "the tribunal") constituted under the Delhi School Education Act,1973 (for brevity "the Act"). When this matter was listed before the Division Bench, two decisions, namely, Kathuria Public School v. Director of Education & another, 2005 VI A.D. (Del) 893 and Servants of People Society & others v. Smt. Sudesh Oberoi & another, 2007 L.I.C. 2774 were cited and the Division Bench noticing the conflict of opinion thought it apt that the controversy should be resolved by a larger Bench and, accordingly, the matter has been placed before us. 2. The resume of facts which are imperative to be stated are that the tribunal which has been empowered under the Act to deal with certain grievances of the employees working in Delhi schools thought it seemly to refer certain issues as regards its jurisdiction and execution/implementation of its orders. The questions those have been referred by the tribunal are as follows: "(i) As to whether this Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with all the grievances of school teachers and employees including minor penalties as defined in Rule 117 (a) of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 in view of the judgment of the Hon"ble Supreme Court in "T.M.A. Pai foundation and Others vs. State of Karnataka" (supra). (ii) If your Lordships reach to a conclusion that this Tribunal has the jurisdiction in case of all grievances of the teachers and employees of recognized schools, then the pending matters before various Benches of Hon"ble High Court of Delhi filed by the aggrieved teachers/employees may please be transferred to Delhi School Tribunal for their disposal as per law; and (iii) Either declare Delhi School Tribunal as a "Court" under the Contempt of Courts Act or direct the Administrator to frame rules for implementation of Section 27 of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 or to devolve power of a Civil Court under Order XXI of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on this Tribunal to enable enforcement of judgments and orders passed by the Tribunal." 3. On a bare reading of the aforesaid questions, it is clear as crystal that question Nos. 1 and 2 are interlinked and interconnected and if the answer in respect of 1st question is answered in the affirmative, the 2nd question would melt into insignificance. 4. To appreciate the controversy, it is necessitous to refer to Section 8 of the Act. Sub-sections 3 and 4, of the Section being relevant for the present purpose, are reproduced herein below:- "8. Terms and conditions of service of employees of recognised private schools – (1) & (2) xx xx xx xx (3) Any employee of a recognised private school who is dismissed, removed or reduced in rank may, within three months from the date of communication to him of the order of such dismissal, removal or reduction in rank, appeal against such order to the Tribunal constituted under section 11. (4) Where the managing committee of a recognised private school intends to suspend any of its employees, such intention shall be communicated to the Director and no such suspension shall be made except with the prior approval of the Director: Provided that the managing committee may suspend an employee with immediate effect and without the prior approval of the Director if it is satisfie