High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 01 DEL CK 3749

Satyendra Kumar vs Managing Committee Of Maharaja Agarsain Public School & Anr.

Delhi High Court · Decided on 9 January 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tushar Rao Gedela, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 16636/2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 336 words

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)

(The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid Mode)

CM APPL. 66970/2023

1.

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 16636/2023

3.

This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus to initiate proceedings of imprisonment of Manager of the respondent school under Section 27(a) of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973 for non-compliance of orders passed by learned Delhi School Tribunal in Appeal No. 75/2017, filed by the petitioner.

4.

The petitioner also prays for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to take over the management of the school, i.e. respondent no.1 for violating the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973.

5.

Mr. Akshit Tomar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that despite number of reminders, the respondent no.2 has not disposed of the representation filed on his behalf in regard to the dispute raised in the present petition.

6.

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the present petition is treated as a representation to respondent no.2 and same is disposed of in a time bound manner.

7.

Issue notice.

8.

Notice accepted by Ms. Latika Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2.

9.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the present petition be treated as a representation of the petitioner to be placed before the Competent Authority of the respondent no.2, i.e. the Deputy Director of Education, Zone-10, North West (A). The said representation be considered by the aforesaid competent authority in accordance with law and after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as also to the respondent no.1 school, and dispose of the representation accordingly, preferably within six weeks from today.

10.

It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on merits of the present petition.

11.

In view of the above, the petition stands disposed of alongwith pending applications.