Renu Barrot v. Director Of Education & ANR

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: May 11, 2018 + WP (C) 5075/2018 & CM APPL. No. 19620/2018 ANITA SOHARU GULERIA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. M A Niyazi and Ms. Kirti Jaswal, Advocates

Versus

THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ANR.

.... Respondents Through: Ms. Rachana Srivastava and Ms.

Monika, Advocates Mr. Ankur Chhibber and Mr. Bhanu Gupta, Advocates + WP (C) 5099/2018 & CM APPL. 19712/2018 RENU BARROT ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. M A Niyazi and Ms. Kirti Jaswal, Advocates

Versus

DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rachana Srivastava and Ms.

Monika, Advocates Mr. Ankur Chhibber and Mr. Bhanu Gupta, Advocates Mr. Ruchir Gupta and Mr.Bhaskar Chhakara, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

(ORAL)

1.

In the above captioned two petitions, a mandamus is sought to respondents to seek benefits of MACP, fresh appointment letter with correct date of regularization and confirmation, contributory pension Scheme, proper back wages/arrears, LTA, bonus etc. 2.

With the consent of learned counsel of the parties, the above captioned two petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

3.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that in the first instance, a concise representation would be made to respondentSchool within a period of two weeks. If it is so done, then the respondent-School shall give a speaking response on the said representation within a period of twelve weeks and its fate be conveyed to petitioners within two weeks thereafter.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for petitioners submit that if petitioners are not satisfied with the response of respondent-School on their representations, then they be permitted to make a fresh Representation to first respondent within two weeks of receiving the response from respondent-School.

5.

Upon receipt of said Representations from petitioners, first respondent shall pass a speaking order thereon within a period of twelve weeks and the fate of such Representations be conveyed to petitioners within two weeks thereafter, so that petitioners may avail of the remedy as available in law, if need be.

6.

With the aforesaid directions, both these petitions are disposed of with a clarification that if personal hearing is sought by petitioners, it be provided to them.

7.

With the aforesaid directions, both these petitions and the applications are accordingly disposed of.

Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MAY 11, 2018 p