VIDYA BHARATI SCHOOL Vs. DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Najmi Waziri, J . 1. This appeal impugns the order dtd. 25/7/2018 passed in W.P.(C) 7700/2018, which has dismissed the appellant's writ petition, in which it had impugned the directions issued by the Directorate of Education ('DOE'), GNCTD, requiring the school to pay arrears of salaries of employees in terms of the 6th Pay Commission.

(2.) The school had raised two contentions, one of them being that the directions of the DOE were not applicable to it because the school teachers at a staff meeting had agreed to forgo their arrears of enhanced pay. Therefore, the same could not be sought by any of the teachers; all the more because the school had not enhanced its fees nor collected the same for paying the enhanced salaries. The school claimed that it did not have the financial wherewithal to pay the arrears. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Staff Committee had duly understood and appreciated the school's financial incapacity and they had, therefore, agreed to forego enhanced salaries for all times. This contention was rejected by the DOE and rightly so, on the ground that there could not be a waiver of statutory rights of the teachers by way of a private agreement. This is in breach of Sec. 10 of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973, and militates against the public policy of payment of due remuneration, as fixed by the Government from time to time. Such waiver if allowed would subvert the larger public good and render school teachers virtually at the mercy of schools, who may well compel them to discharge their duties at a lesser salary at the threat of being dismissed from service. The DOE's rationale for rejecting the school's contention is recorded in its order dtd. 10/10/2016. The relevant portions are reproduced hereunder:

(3.) The impugned order holds that the school was liable to pay the arrears in terms of pay fixation dtd. 11/2/2009 and the school was bound to follow the mandatory directions; we see no reason to disagree with the impugned order because a private agreement cannot subvert inflation related ameliorative statutory mandate of enhanced salary to employees to whom the 6th Pay Commission Recommendations extend. There cannot be an estoppel against statutory compliance.