Delhi High Court
Satyendra Kumar vs Managing Committee Of Maharaja ... on 9 January, 2024
Author: Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela
$~48
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 09.01.2024
+ W.P.(C) 16636/2023
SATYENDRA KUMAR ..... Petitioner
versus
MANAGING COMMITTEE OF
MAHARAJA AGARSAIN PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ANR
..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Akshit Tomar, Advocate alongwith
petitioner.
For the Respondents : Ms. Latika Choudhury, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
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
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 16636/2023 Page 1 of 3 By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:12.01.2024 14:35:28 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.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 16636/2023 Page 2 of 3 By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:12.01.2024 14:35:28
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.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J JANUARY 9, 2024/Aj
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 16636/2023 Page 3 of 3 By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:12.01.2024 14:35:28
