In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, through a judgment delivered by Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Sandeep Mehta, upheld the accountability of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) for the unauthorized closure of Khalsa Boys Primary School, New Delhi. The court dismissed the appeals filed by both the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and DSGMC, clarifying the legal responsibilities surrounding the closure and the employment rights of the school’s staff.
Background of the Case
The appeals arose from the 2009 judgment of the Delhi High Court concerning the DSGMC’s decision to close and relocate Khalsa Boys Primary School, originally situated within the premises of Gurudwara Bangla Sahib, to Mata Sundari College, New Delhi. The school, which had been operational with substantial support (95% grant-in-aid) from the NDMC, was shifted by the DSGMC without the requisite permissions. This move was met with legal challenges by the school’s staff, including the Headmistress and other employees, leading to multiple writ petitions in the Delhi High Court.
The High Court initially stayed the proposed shift, but despite this, the DSGMC demolished a substantial portion of the school, rendering it non-functional. This action prompted the NDMC to cease the grant-in-aid under the Delhi Education Act and Rules, 1973, citing the relocation outside its jurisdiction as the primary reason.
Legal Issues Involved
The Supreme Court’s judgment centered on the following key legal issues:
1. Validity of the Closure: The DSGMC closed the school without obtaining the mandatory approval from the Director of Education, NDMC, as required by Rule 46 of the Delhi Education Rules. The court found that the DSGMC’s actions did not meet the legal standards for closure, which necessitate full justification and prior approval.
2. Responsibility for Employee Welfare: The core of the dispute was whether the NDMC or DSGMC was liable for the salaries and benefits of the school staff post-closure. The DSGMC argued that the NDMC should absorb the surplus staff under Rule 47 of the Delhi Education Rules. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that such absorption could only occur if the closure was lawful, which in this case, it was not.
3. Reimbursement and Compensation: The NDMC was directed by the High Court to pay the staff their arrears and pension but was allowed to seek reimbursement from the DSGMC. The Supreme Court affirmed this directive, clarifying that NDMC’s obligation to pay interest on delayed payments would remain unaffected, and the council retains the right to recover these amounts from DSGMC.
Court’s Decision and Observations
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals filed by DSGMC (Civil Appeal Nos. 7442-7444 of 2012) and NDMC (Civil Appeal Nos. 7440-7441 of 2012), thereby upholding the Delhi High Court’s ruling. The judgment emphasized that DSGMC’s failure to adhere to legal protocols for school closure invalidated its claim that NDMC should bear the financial burden of the displaced staff.
Justice Mehta, in the judgment, remarked, “Since the closure of the school in question was undertaken de hors Rule 46, the argument advanced on behalf of the appellant-DSGMC that the onus to absorb the surplus teaching and non-teaching staff would be that of the NDMC, has no legal sanction and cannot be sustained.”
Details of Parties and Legal Representation
– Case Numbers: Civil Appeal Nos. 7440-7441 of 2012 and Civil Appeal Nos. 7442-7444 of 2012.
– Bench: Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Sandeep Mehta.
– Appellants: New Delhi Municipal Council and Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee.
– Respondents: Manju Tomar and other staff members of the Khalsa Boys Primary School.
– Counsel: Shri Ritesh Khatri represented the DSGMC.
