Veena Rani v. Punjabi Academy & ORS.
$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 823/2026 & CM APPL. 4067/2026 VEENA RANI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg and Ms.
Kavita Agrawal, Advocates.
versus PUNJABI ACADEMY & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Mrs.
Avnish Ahlawat, SC for GNCTD with Mr. N.K. Singh, Ms.
Aliza Alam and Mr.
Mohnish Sehrawat, Advocates for R-1 & 2.
Dr. Divya Swamy, Standing Counsel for MCD with Mr. Yagyawalkya Singh, Mr. Anubhav Agrawal, Mr.
Rishav Ranjan, Ms. Nidhi Kumar, Ms. Akriti Singh, Ms. Ananya and Mr. Sikhar, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R
% 21.01.2026 1.
The Petitioner asserts that she is a qualified teacher and has been working in MCD Primary Schools since 2002. She relies upon the appointment letters annexed with the writ petition and states that she has been continuously working for the last 23 years on contractual basis, teaching Punjabi language to children in MCD schools. 2.
In the above background, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
"A) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ whereby directing the respondents to regularize the petitioner for the post of teacher for Punjabi language from November 2002. B) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ whereby directing the respondents to calculate and pay the Petitioner arrears of salary at 50% of the salary of regularly appointed Assistant Primary Teachers for the entire period of her service from November 2002 to 10th May 2025.
C) Any other relief which this honorable court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstanced for this case.
D) Pass any other order that this Hon'ble Court, thinks is just and proper."
3.
Counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, states that he does not wish to press Prayer A and confines his relief to Prayer B. 4.
The Petitioner places reliance on the decision of this Court dated 15th July, 2025 passed in W.P.(C) 3675/2017, titled Avtar Singh v. Punjabi Academy & Anr. and connected matters, and seeks parity therewith. 5.
The Court has heard counsel for the Respondents. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner is similarly placed as the petitioners in Avtar Singh. However, counsel for the Respondents submit that the Punjabi Academy has already filed an LPA No. 29/2026 against the said judgment wherein the Division Bench of this Court has issued notice on the delay application. 6.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with the observation that the decision dated 15th July, 2025 passed in W.P.(C) 3675/2017 shall apply to the Petitioner as well. Since the said decision is pending challenge before the Division Bench, the relief and directions flowing therefrom shall apply to the Petitioner, subject to the outcome of LPA 29/2026.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
7.
With the above directions, the present petition is disposed of. SANJEEV NARULA, J JANUARY 21, 2026/ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.