Delhi High Court
30 May 2023
Uncommunicated Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs)
cannot be relied upon by Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) while selecting
a candidate for promotion to the post of Principal in a private unaided
recognized school – Delhi High Court
On 10.07.1989, Mrs.
Vinita Kapoor was appointed as PGT (English) in Kulachi Hansraj Model School.
Kulachi Hansraj Model School is a private
unaided recognized school in Delhi.
On 01.08.1991,
Mrs. Sarita Tyagi was appointed as PGT (Chemistry) in Shaheed Raj Pal DAV Public School. Shaheed Raj Pal DAV Public School is also
a private unaided recognized school in Delhi.
Kulachi Hansraj
Model School, as well as Shaheed Raj Pal DAV
Public School, runs under the aegis of DAV College Managing Committee.
On 12.07.1993, Mrs. Jyotsna Sood was appointed as PGT (English) in Shaheed
Raj Pal DAV Public School.
On 08.07.1994, Mrs. Vinita Kapoor was transferred from Kulachi Hansraj Model School to Shaheed Raj Pal DAV
Public School.
On 11.08.2021, DPC was convened for selecting a candidate for promotion to
the post of Principal. However, only Mrs. Vinita Kapoor was interviewed by the
DPC and no other candidate was interviewed by the DPC.
On 11.08.2021, Mrs. Vinita Kapoor was promoted to the post of Principal.
Mrs. Sarita Tyagi
and Mrs. Jyotsna Sood, being aggrieved,
challenged the promotion of Mrs. Vinita Kapoor to the post of Principal before the
Hon’ble Delhi High Court. They submitted that Mrs. Vinita Kapoor was
transferred from Kulachi Hansraj Model School to Shaheed Raj Pal DAV Public
School on 08.07.1994 and, therefore, Mrs. Vinita Kapoor is junior to both the
petitioners. It was also submitted that 5 years’ service of Mrs. Vinita Kapoor
of working as PGT in Kulachi Hansraj Model School was wrongly added on transfer
to Shaheed Raj Pal DAV Public School.
During hearing of
the writ petition, Hon’ble Delhi High Court directed Shaheed Raj Pal DAV Public School to produce the original record of the DPC
before the Court.
The record of the DPC was produced before the Court and it was discovered
that adverse and uncommunicated ACRs of Mrs. Sarita Tyagi and Mrs. Jyotsna Sood
were considered by the DPC while selecting Mrs. Vinita Kapoor for promotion to
the post of Principal.
Hon’ble Delhi High Court, while allowing the writ petition, directed as under:
-
“37. It thus transpires that neither were the Petitioners afforded an
opportunity to represent against any tentative seniority list nor against the
adverse 'Average' ACRs. despite the law being well settled on both the issues
and have consequently suffered the result of losing out on promotion to the
post of Principal. Therefore, following the law declared by the Supreme Court,
it is imperative to direct the School to permit the Petitioners to represent
against the seniority list and communicate all the five ACRs. to the
Petitioners which were in reckoning before the DPC.
38. Accordingly, School is directed to circulate the seniority list of
PGTs and invite objections. It is left open to the Petitioners to file
objections/representations after the tentative seniority list is circulated. If
representations are received by the School against the draft seniority list,
the same shall be considered in accordance with law and the provisions of
Rules, 1973 as well as the Manual relied upon by the Petitioners, subject to
its applicability. After taking a decision on the representations, a final
seniority list shall be published by the School. The entire exercise shall be
completed within 2 months from today.
39. School is further directed to communicate the ACRs. for the period
2015-2016 to 2019-2020 to the Petitioners, within three weeks from today. It is
open to the Petitioners to prefer representations against the ACRs. within two
weeks of receipt of the ACRs. School shall thereafter take a considered
decision in accordance with law on the representations, if any and needless to
state, if there is upgradation in the ACR(s) of the Petitioners, a review DPC
shall be convened by the School to consider the case of the Petitioners for
promotion to the post of Principal along with the other senior-most PGTs, after
finalisation of the seniority list and depending on the zone of consideration.
It is made clear that Respondent No. 4 shall continue to function as Principal
albeit on re-employment basis in the interest of the administration of the
School as well as students and her continuance will be subject to the outcome
of the review DPC, if any. In case any of the Petitioners is recommended by the
DPC, promotion order shall follow along with all consequential benefits.
40. Writ petition is allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid directions.”
[Sarita Tyagi and Ors. Vs. Shaheed Raj Pal Dav Public
School and Ors., W.P. (C) 12795/2021, MANU/DE/3862/2023, 2023/DHC /003845,
Delhi High Court, Decided On: 30.05.2023]
https://advocateanujaggarwal.com/home.php
Anuj Aggarwal
Advocate
D-26/A, First Floor, Jangpura Extension,
New Delhi - 110014
483, Block-2, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi-110003
Mobile – 9891403206
Landline – 011 - 35554905
Email – anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment