← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/5059/2016

Meena Verma v. East Delhi Municipal Corporation And ANR

2016-05-30Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw2 pages

$~464 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5059/2016 & CM No.21124/2016 (for directions) MEENA VERMA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kaushal Yadav, Adv.

Versus

EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR... Respondents Through:

Mr. Pravesh Thakur, Adv. for R-1.

Mr. Anil Kumar Sangel with Mr.

Siddharth Sangel & Mr. Abhay Kumar Tayal, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

O R D E R

% 30.05.2016 1.

The petition seeks mandamus to the respondent no.1 East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC) to pay to the petitioner, working as a Primary School Teacher with the respondent no.1 EDMC, her salary for the months of June and July, 2005 at the rate of Rs.10,435/- per month along with interest.

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that her salary for the said months was wrongly credited by the respondent no.2 State Bank of India (SBI) into the account of one Mr. Rajesh Kumar instead to the account of the petitioner with the respondent no.2 SBI.

3.

The counsels for the respondents no.1&2 appear on advance notice and on enquiry state that it will have to be investigated whether the salary was paid or not and if was not paid will have to be paid. 4.

Though the petition is highly belated but on compassionate grounds, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the same with the following directions: W.P.(C) 5059/2016

(i) The respondents no.1&2 EDMC and SBI to conduct an inquiry into the matter and complete the same within three months of today.

(ii) The petitioner to furnish to the respondents all the document which the respondents may require in this connection. (iii) If ultimately the salary is found due to the petitioner and a decision is taken to release the same to the petitioner, the question of payment of interest if any to the petitioner thereon be also considered.

(iv) Merely because this direction has been made would not entitle the petitioner to, if remains aggrieved from the outcome aforesaid, to as a matter of right pursue the matter. RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J MAY 30, 2016 „gsr‟..

W.P.(C) 5059/2016