High Court Stays Directions On Delhi Govt To Constitute Committees To Implement Pay Commission Recommendations For Private School Staff
The Delhi High Court has stayed directions issued to the State Government by a single bench, which had directed the constitution of two High Powered Committees (HPCs) to supervise the implementation of recommendations prescribed in the 6th and 7th Central Pay Commissions (CPCs).These recommendations pertained to the payment of salaries and arrears to the staff of private unaided schools...
The Delhi High Court has stayed directions issued to the State Government by a single bench, which had directed the constitution of two High Powered Committees (HPCs) to supervise the implementation of recommendations prescribed in the 6th and 7th Central Pay Commissions (CPCs).
These recommendations pertained to the payment of salaries and arrears to the staff of private unaided schools and recognized private unaided minority schools in the national capital.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna was hearing an appeal against the single judge’s order, moved by various staff from different schools. It said: “Till further orders, there shall be a stay of paragraphs 200, 204 and 205 of the impugned judgment and order.”
In the said paragraphs, the single judge had directed the Delhi Government to constitute the HPCs at the Central and Zonal levels. It was deemed necessary to authorize and constitute HPCs for meticulous inspection of the claims raised by the school staff.
Appellants contended that the constitution of HPCs was beyond the powers of a writ court under the Constitution and that the said Committees were adjudicatory bodies with powers to decide the school fees and even conclude that the school was not in a position to pay the 6th and 7th CPCs. It was argued that such high powers could only be ascribed to a committee through legislation, and not by the impugned orders.
It was also argued that there was no justification for sending the appellant's case to the proposed Committees as the Delhi Government’s Directorate of Education had already passed orders on the issue.
Upon issuing the order of stay, the bench directed the advocates to take notice on behalf of the parties and fixed the next date of hearing on the 15th of January 2024.
“Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1 and Mr. Yeeshu Jain, learned ASC accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.2. They pray for and are permitted to file their reply affidavits within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavits, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing,” the court said.
Counsel for Appellants: Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Ms. Ashna Khan, Mr. Kumar Utkarsh and Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocates
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Kamal Gupta, Mr. Manish Vashist, Ms. Kriti Gupta and Mr. Sparsh, Aggarwal, Advocates for R-1; Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Additional Standing Counsel along with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Ms. Manisha and Mr. Hitanshu Mishra, Advocates for R-2
Title: RENU ARORA AND OTHERS v. ST. MARGARET SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL & ANR.