Saroj Bala vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Others

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

The respondents issued an Advertisement in the year 2002 for various posts, including the post of Teacher (Primary) - Post Code No.013/2002. The applicant was one of the contenders and she was selected and appointed. According to her, there was some delay in issuing the order of appointment to her, whereas her other batch mates, including those, who are less meritorious to her, were appointed by the respondents on 01.07.2003. The applicant was issued order of appointment on 03.04.2006, on account of litigation, that was ensued regarding social status. A new Pension Scheme came into force w.e.f. 01.01.2004. The applicant contends that her batch mates are covered by the old Pension Scheme, whereas, she was put in the new Pension Scheme to her detriment. By making reference to certain orders passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the applicant filed representation dated 30.06.2020 seeking redressal of her grievance and complains that no steps thereon have been taken.

We heard Mr. Ranjit Sharma, learned counsel for applicant, Mr. R K Jain & Mr. Parminder Singh, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Ms. Esha Mazumdar, learned counsel for respondent No.2, at the stage of admission, through video conferencing.

The applicant filed a representation, only in the recent past. Her efforts seem to be, to ensure that she too would get pension on par with her batch mates. The question as to whether the applicant stands on the same footing as the teachers, who are granted the reliefs by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, needs to be examined by the respondents.

We, therefore, dispose of the O.A. directing the respondents to pass orders on the aforesaid representation made by the applicant within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.