Monday, September 3, 2018

Delhi High Court – Subsistence Allowance – Rule 116, Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 - Direction to a private unaided unrecognized school to pay subsistence allowance to its teacher – Held, “subsistence allowance in law is a natural entitlement of every employee subject to the ignominy of suspension.” [Simmi Kathpal vs. Hanuman Mandir Public School and Ors; W.P. (C) 6840/2017; Date of decision: 28th August, 2018]


On 28 August 2018, Hon’ble Delhi High Court directed a private unaided unrecognized school to pay subsistence allowance to its teacher. The teacher was kept under suspension for more than 2 years but was not paid any money on account of subsistence allowance.

Anuj Aggarwal, Ashutosh Dixit and Kshitij Arora, Advocates, appearing for the petitioner/teacher, argued that it is a statutory duty of school, including unrecognized school, to pay subsistence allowance to its teacher who is suspended from service. Accepting the submissions, Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Hari Shankar directed the school to pay subsistence allowance to the teacher. It was, inter alia, noted by the Hon’ble Court as under:-

The petitioner has, in fact, had to run from pillar to post, for the past three years, in order to ensure payment of subsistence allowance to her which, in law, is a natural entitlement of every employee subject to the ignominy of suspension. Subsistence allowance, it has to be noted, is essentially intended to tide the employee over the period of suspension, so that, she or he is able to prosecute the proceedings against her, or him and is not left with no means of sustenance, being “out”, so to speak, of a job.

The contention of the respondent/school that writ petition is not maintainable against a private school was also rejected.


No comments:

Post a Comment