Summary
A management that closes a recognised aided school without the Director's prior approval under Rule 46 of the Delhi School Education Rules cannot use Rule 47 to put on the government the duty to absorb and pay the surplus staff. DSGMC's appeals were dismissed. NDMC was directed to pay the remaining dues and interest to the staff, with liberty to recover them from DSGMC, and limitation does not bar that recovery.
Issues
- Whether DSGMC, having demolished and closed an NDMC-aided school without prior approval and in breach of a High Court stay, could rely on Rule 47 to make NDMC responsible for absorbing and paying the surplus staff.
- Whether NDMC had to bear the salary, pension and interest dues of the staff, and whether its claim to reimbursement from DSGMC was barred by limitation.
Provisions considered
- Rule 46, Delhi School Education Rules, 1973The rule was quoted. A managing committee may not close a recognised school (other than an unaided minority school), or an existing class, without full justification and the Director's prior approval, and the Director must consult the Advisory Board first. The Court held that DSGMC's closure of the aided school without that approval was outside Rule 46. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19)
- Rule 47, Delhi School Education Rules, 1973As described by counsel, the rule provides that staff made surplus by the closure or derecognition of a recognised school may, as far as possible, be absorbed in government or aided schools. The Court held that Rule 47 applies only to a valid closure made with prior approval under Rule 46. It does not cover an unauthorised closure. (¶¶ 17, 19)
Held
- Several facts were undisputed. DSGMC demolished a substantial part of the school building without NDMC's permission and despite the High Court's stay of 30.05.2005. Recognition and the 95% grant were withdrawn on 14.02.2006, and DSGMC never challenged that order. The obligation to meet the staff's pay and service benefits therefore fell on DSGMC. (¶ 13)
- The order of 01.10.2019 in the contempt petition found that DSGMC's offers of re-employment did not comply with the High Court's directions and so were not bona fide. That order became final when DSGMC's appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15)
- Absorption of surplus staff under Rule 47 arises only where the school is closed in accordance with law, with full justification and the Director's prior approval under Rule 46. Because the school was closed without that approval, DSGMC cannot use Rule 47 to shift the burden of re-employment and salaries to NDMC. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19)
- The Supreme Court's order of 07.07.2010 directed NDMC to pay the staff and expressly left open NDMC's right to reimbursement. Limitation therefore does not bar NDMC from recovering the amounts it paid from DSGMC. (¶¶ 22, 23)
- NDMC had already paid the principal amounts, so there was no reason to interfere with the High Court's direction to pay interest. NDMC must pay the remaining dues with interest and may recover them from DSGMC. (¶¶ 24, 25, 26)
Result
DSGMC's Civil Appeal Nos. 7442-7444 of 2012 dismissed. NDMC's Civil Appeal Nos. 7440-7441 of 2012 disposed of with a direction to pay all remaining dues, including interest, to the staff within eight weeks. NDMC may seek reimbursement from DSGMC, including by impleadment in Contempt Petition No. 805 of 2016 before the Delhi High Court. No costs.