Rule 47 Of Delhi Education Rules Cannot Be Invoked To Shift Burden Of Payment Of Staff Salaries To NDMC When School Closure Was Unlawful: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that the Rule 47 of the Delhi Education Rules cannot be invoked to shift the responsibility of re-employing and paying the salaries of surplus teachers and non-teaching staff to NDMC when the school's closure was not carried out in accordance with the law.
The Court said that the question of absorption only arises when the closure of the school is done in accordance with law, which requires a full justification and prior approval of the Director as per Rule 46.
The Court was hearing a Civil Appeal filed by New Delhi Municipal Council and Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee arising out of a common judgment passed by the High Court of Delhi in Letters Patent Appeal.
The bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed, “the school in question being run by the appellant-DSGMC was receiving a 95% grant from NDMC, and the same was closed down without due approval of the Director (Education), NDMC. As a consequence, the appellant-DSGMC cannot be allowed to take the shield of Rule 47 of the Delhi Education Rules so as to claim that the burden of re-employment and payment of salaries of the surplus teachers and the non- teaching staff upon closure of the school would be that of the NDMC. The question of absorption only arises when the closure of the school is done in accordance with law, which requires a full justification and prior approval of the Director as per Rule 46 supra.”
Advocate Ritesh Khatri appeared for the Appellant.
Brief Facts-
The Appellant-DSGMC managed Khalsa Boys Primary School on the premises of Gurudwara Bangla Sahib used to get 95% funding from NDMC. Due to the operational challenges and dilapidated condition of the school building DSGMC decided to relocate the school to Mata Sundari College which was outside the jurisdiction of the NDMC. The staff opposed the relocation and obtained a stay from the Delhi High Court. In spite of the stay, DSGMC partially demolished the building after which the NDMC stopped its grant.
The NDMC denied approval for the school's relocation and withdrew recognition after which the staff sought absorption in other schools and claimed salaries. The Court directed DSGMC to continue paying salaries and ordered NDMC to determine if post-facto approval for the closure could be granted. The Division Bench ruled in favour of the staff and ordered arrears, re-employment, and pension payments which is now challenged in the present appeals by DSGMC and NDMC.
“Since the closure of the school in question was undertaken de hors Rule 46, the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant- DSGMC that the onus to absorb the surplus teaching and non- teaching staff would be that of the NDMC, has no legal sanction and cannot be sustained.”, the Court opined.
The Court said that the Appellant-NDMC shall be entitled to take recourse of the appropriate remedy for reimbursement of the amounts paid to respondents-staff of the school from the DSGMC, in case the DSGMC voluntarily fails to reimburse the said amount.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the Civil Appeals.
