Pooja Kapoor vs Director of Education and Others

Valmiki J Mehta, J.—There are four issues in this writ petition. First is for grant of maternity leave benefit to the petitioner. This benefit has already been granted to the petitioner as stated by the respondent nos. 2 and 3. The second relief which is claimed is for petitioner''s son who studies in the respondent no. 2-school to get benefit of Rule 125 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973. As per Rule 125, petitioner will be entitled to either free education or reimbursement of tuition fee as payable by the Govt., of NCT of Delhi to employees. Since Govt., of NCT of Delhi is paying Rs. 1250/- to its employees, counsel for respondent-school states that this benefit will be given to the petitioner. This therefore disposes of the second relief claimed by the petitioner.

The third relief which is claimed is for treating the petitioner as a confirmed employee/teacher. Counsel for respondent-school states that there is no issue in this regard and petitioner already stands confirmed in terms of the letter dated 24.3.2009.

The final relief which is sought is for payment to the petitioner of certain benefits in terms of 6th Pay Commission Report accepted for implementation with respect to schools. Counsel for respondent-school states that without prejudice to the school''s rights, more so because respondent-school is a recognized school only from December, 2011, petitioner will be paid the benefits of 6th Pay Commission Report as is payable to employees of the government schools.

In view of the above, all the controversies in the petition stand satisfied. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above said observations, leaving parties to bear their own costs. The arrears which would be payable to the petitioner be now paid within a period of three months from today.