RAJ KUMARI Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Raj Kumari, hereinafter referred to as the petitioner was appointed as a 'caller woman' a class IV employee in S.D. Hari Mandir School against a vacancy created due resignation of Ram Kali w.e.f. 1.9.64 on compensate grounds being a widow of Jeevandamal a freedom fighter. As per averments made by the petitioner in this writ petition, she has been continuously working in this institution since 1.9.64 without any break and she has been assingned different types of duty by the management of the school such as cleaning of laboratory, office and to do other miscellaneous jobs of taking children from their homes. In fact, she has been performing duties of a peon as a class IV employee of the institution. Though she has put in 23 years of service but she has not been declared confirmed by the concerned authorities while her juniors have been confirmed. She has also been deprived of service benefits like uniform allowance, washing allowance, medical facilities, overtime allowance as provided under Sections 8 and 10 of Delhi School Education Act, though her other counterparts are getting such benefits. According to her, this act of the respondents is violative of Articles 14, 16 and 23 of the Constitution of India. She has challenged this act of the respondent by filing this writ petition, seeking the relief that the respondent be directed to confirm her before the date of the confirmation of respondents 5 to 10 who joined service later than her. She should be declared senior to respondents 5 to 10 and that she should be awarded her all due service benefits with retrospective effect.

(2.) The respondent contested this writ petition and filed a counter affidavit pleading, inter alia, that this writ petition is not maintainable having been filed after a lapse of 2 years of the rejection of her representation in 1985. Earlier she filed a civil suit for declaration before the Court of Sub Judge, Delhi and but the same was dismissed. Her petition before the "central Administrative Tribunal was also dismissed. Jurisdiction of this Court to entertain this writ petition has been challenged in view of Section 28 of the Central Administrative Act.

(3.) On merits, it is pleaded that she is illiterate and does not possess qualification to be appointed as a class IV employee. Being a widow of a freedom fighter, she was appointed as a caller-woman which is a post in itself having no regular basis. She cannot be equated with other class IV employees of the institution as she neither possesses the requisite qualification nor the capacity to man any of those class IV posts. The post of caller woman not being regular post, she was not declared regular or confirmed. She is not entitled to claim any privilege and service benefits being a temporary employee.