VANDANA RANA vs DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS

The petitioner by this writ petition is seeking the relief of

making his ad hoc/contractual appointment as permanent with the

respondent no.3/Army Public School, Sadar Bazar Road Branch, Delhi

Cantt-10 by relying upon the ratio of the judgment delivered by this Court in

three connected cases with lead case being Army Public School and Anr.

Vs. Narendra Singh Nain and Anr. in W.P.(C) No.1439/2013 decided on

30.8.2013. The judgment in the case of Army Public School and Anr.

(supra) was taken in challenge to a Division Bench of this Court and the

Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 29.10.2015 in bunch of

LPAs with lead LPA No.223/2015, dismissed the appeal filed by Army

Welfare Education Society. The schools run by the Army Welfare

Education Society in the judgment dated 29.10.2015 includes the respondent

no.3/school. The Army Welfare Education Society challenged the judgment

of the Division Bench of this Court dated 29.10.2015 by filing an SLP, and

which SLP(C) No.3609/2016 was dismissed by the Supreme Court in limine

vide its order dated 12.2.2016.

Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 could not dispute that

accordingly petitioner has to get the benefit of the judgment delivered by

this Court in the case of Army Public School and Anr. (supra) and later

judgment of this Court in the case titled as Renu Barrot Vs. The Directorate

of Education & Ors. in W.P.(C) No.6180/2013 decided on 27.4.2015

inasmuch as petitioner has worked with the respondent no.3/school as a

Library Attendant in terms of various appointment letters describing the

petitioner as a Library Attendant. It is clarified that though in the writ

petition, petitioner claims to be a Junior Librarian, in view of consistent

appointment letters of the petitioner being appointed as Library Attendant,

petitioner today only seeks the relief of being regularized and made

permanent against the post of Library Attendant.

In view of the above facts, the petitioner will be treated as

being a regular and permanent employee on completion of period of three

years from the date of his appointment of the petitioner with the respondent

no.3/school. The date of first appointment of the petitioner with the

respondent no.3/school is 9.7.2007 i.e petitioner will become a permanent

employee of the respondent no.3 from 9.7.2010. It is further clarified that

petitioner having become permanent employee of the respondent no.3 w.e.f

9.7.2010, she should since this date get service benefits in terms of Section

10 of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 i.e petitioner must get monetary

benefits equal to a government teacher/employee on the same post of the

petitioner being a Library Attendant, however, since law of limitation

applies to a writ petition in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in

the case of State of Orissa and Another Vs. Mamta Mohanty (2011) 3 SCC

436, petitioner no doubt will be entitled to the same pay scale and same

monetary benefits payable to the Library Attendant in a government school

or government aided school, except the fact that such monetary benefits will

be payable to the petitioner prospectively from the date three years before

filing of the writ petition on 28.6.2016. To clarify further, w.e.f 28.6.2013,

and not before, petitioner will be entitled to monetary emoluments and

benefits as payable to a Library Attendant or a person having appointed to a

similar type of post with qualifications of the petitioner in a government

school or government aided school. Petitioner''s services however for the

purpose of subsequent service benefits will be taken as petitioner having

been confirmed w.e.f 9.7.2010 and as regards his future promotion or

MACP benefits or pensionary benefits or any other benefits as payable on

account of number of years of services of the petitioner with the respondent

no.3/school.

In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed making the

petitioner permanent in her services w.e.f 9.7.2010 noting that petitioner''s

first appointment commenced from 9.7.2007, with the further relief to the

petitioner that prospectively from 28.6.2013 petitioner will get all monetary

benefits payable to an equivalent or roughly equivalent positioned employee

in a government school or government aided school. Petitioner''s services

however will in accordance with law be treated as having been confirmed

from 9.7.2010 and with the period of services being taken as per law, if so

required, from 9.7.2007. Respondent no.3 will now calculate the monetary

emoluments which would be payable to the petitioner taking the

qualification of the petitioner as compared to similarly qualified

persons/employees/teachers employed in posts in a government school or

government aided school and such monetary benefits from 28.6.2013 will be

paid by the respondent no.3 to the petitioner within a period of three months

from today.

Writ petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of with the

aforesaid observations.