MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF SHIKSHA BHARATI SENIOR SECONDARY PUBLIC SCHOOL Vs. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner School impugns the order dated 31st March, 2009 of the Delhi School Tribunal, allowing the appeal of the Respondent No. 2 Ms. Deepshikha Saxena, declaring that she continues to be in the service of the Petitioner School without any break and directing the Petitioner School to also pay to her 50% salary, allowances and benefits for the period from 2nd May, 1998 onwards within two months failing which the Petitioner School was also directed to pay interest thereon @12% per annum. Notice of the petition was issued on 6th October, 2009. Noticing that the Respondent No. 2 had been working with one Kamal Model Senior Secondary School, Mohan Garden, New Delhi, the operation of the order was stayed. Pleadings have been completed and the counsels have been heard.

(2.) THE matter has a chequered and long history. The Respondent No. 2 was vide appointment letter dated 30th June, 1996 appointed as a Primary Teacher in the Petitioner School and on successful completion of the probation was confirmed w.e.f. 10th July, 1997. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent No. 2 on 4th March, 1998 submitted her resignation with one month's notice to the Principal of the Petitioner School and which was accepted vide letter dated 13th April, 1998 signed on behalf of Mrs. N.M. Williams, Manager of the Petitioner School and sent to the Respondent No. 2 under postal certificate. The Petitioner School further claims to have vide another letter dated 13th April, 1998 also under the signatures of Mrs. N.M. Williams, Manager sought formal approval of the Respondent No. 1 Director of Education (DOE) under Rule 114A of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 (DSE Rules) for accepting the said resignation of the Respondent No. 2. It is also the case of the Petitioner School that the Respondent No. 2 on 2nd May, 1998 handed over charge to Mrs. Goel, Principal of the Petitioner School.

(3.) THE DOE vide its letter dated 5th August, 1998 informed the Petitioner School that the proposal for acceptance of resignation of the Respondent No. 2 had not been approved and directed the Petitioner School to reinstate the Respondent No. 2 for the reason that she had denied having submitted the resignation.