Sadhana Saxena v. D.G. (Admn) & ORS.

$~R-97 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 11255/2009 SMT. SADHANA SAXENA ..... Petitioner Through:

None.

versus THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (ADMN.) & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Ms. Barkha Bahhar, Advocate with Ms. Dipanjali Tyagi, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Mr. S.K. Thakur, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

Mr. Siddharth Dutta, Advocate for DOE.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

O R D E R

% 07.02.2017 1.

Learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3 states that the petitioner, after filing of the writ petition, has been paid her salary as per law and which are the circulars and directions of the Director of Education. It is also stated that petitioner is getting the benefit of scale of pay as per the 7th Pay Commission Report as applicable to schools by the order of the Director of Education dated 11.2.2009. Possibly for this reason petitioner does not appear.

W.P.(C) No.11255/2009

2.

In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J FEBRUARY 07, 2017 Ne W.P.(C) No.11255/2009