IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICITION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.21954  OF 2009

Gyan Mandir Society and Anr. …Petitioners

Versus

Ashok Kumar & Ors.                    …Respondents

     O R D E R

T.S. THAKUR, J.

1. In this petition for special leave to appeal the petitioners  

call  in question the correctness of an order dated 20th July,  

2009 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi  

whereby L.P.A. No.1307 of 2007 filed by the petitioners has  

been  dismissed  with  costs  assessed  at  Rs.75,000/-  and  

directions  issued  by  the  learned  Single  Judge  of  the  High  

Court in W.P.(C) No. 11778 of 2006 affirmed.

2. The facts giving rise to the filing of the writ petition and  

the Letters Patent Appeal have been set out in detail by the  

High Court making it unnecessary for us to state them over  

again. Suffice it to say that W.P.(C) 11778 of 2006 was filed by  

the teachers employed with the petitioner society running a  

neighbourhood school at Tis January Lane, New Delhi falling  

within  the  NDMC  area.  With  the  allotment  of  an  area  

measuring  2.284  acres  at  Sadiq  Nagar  in  favour  of  the  

petitioner - society the temporary allotment made in favour of  

the petitioner’s society at Tis January Lane came to an end on  

31st of  March,  1997.  The  society  was  accordingly  asked  to  

hand over the possession of the land but since the school was  

catering  to  the  needs  of  about  500  students  and  several  

teachers  had  been  employed  by  the  society  to  impart  

education  to  the  students,  practical  difficulties  were  

encountered  in  handing  over  the  site.  After  detailed  

deliberations and prolonged correspondence the NDMC offered  

to take over the school on “as is where is” basis.  A letter to  

that effect was issued by the L&DO on 1st April, 2002.  The  

possession of the school was pursuant to that letter handed  

2

over to the L&DO on 8th March, 2006, who on the same day  

delivered the possession of the school building to the NDMC.

3. In  the  meantime  the  society  filed  Writ  Petition  (Civil)  

17889-90 of 2005 seeking permission to construct a building  

for  a  senior  secondary  school  at  Sadiq  Nagar  over  the  site  

allotted in its favour. The High Court allowed that writ petition  

by its order dated 16th March, 2006.  It is note-worthy that in  

the  said  proceedings  the  society  had  made  a  categorical  

statement  that  students  studying  in  the  Tis  January  Lane  

school  can  be  accommodated  by  the  society  in  the  school  

being run by it at Andrews Ganj on freeship basis and if fees  

are charged, the same shall not be in excess of what they were  

paying in the Tis January Lane school.

4. W.P.(C) No.11778 of 2006 was at that stage filed by the  

teachers  employed  by  the  society  for  its  Tis  January  Lane  

school in which they prayed for the following reliefs:-

a) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to  respondent No.1 to cancel the allotment of the Sadiq  

3

Nagar site of school measuring 2.34 acres allotted to  respondent Nos. 4 & 5 vide dated 27.08.1975;

(b)  issue  appropriate  writ,  orders  and  directions  to  the  respondent  No.3  to  immediately  and forthwith to take over the possession of the said  Indian school/site from the respondent Nos. 4 & 5  and to seize all the records of the public school with  freezing of the bank accounts of respondent No. 4 &  5;

c)  issue appropriate writ, orders or directions  to respondent No. 3 to de-recognize the said public  school  at  Sadiq  Nagar,  New  Delhi  and  to  make  arrangements for shifting the existing school at Tis  January Lane to the Sadiq Nagar site;

(d)   issue  appropriate  orders/directions  to  respondent  No.  3  to  ensure  the  protection  of  the  services of the petitioners and the payment of the  arrears of their salaries at the earliest;

(e)  issue appropriate writ,  order or directions  for holding an enquiry under the direct supervision  of this Hon’ble Court to fix the responsibilities of the  concerned officials of the State whereby the Sadiq  Nagar site of the school located at Josip Broz Tito  Marg, New Delhi was misused for running a public  school in the name and style of “Indian School” on  the site allotted for shifting the existing Smt. R.K.K.  Gyan Mandir Middle School from Tis January Lane,  New Delhi and

(f)  issue  such  other  writ,  order/orders/directions,  which  this  Hon’ble  Court  may  deem  fit  and  proper  in  the  facts  and  circumstances of the case in the light of the above  averment and in order to secure the ends of justice  

4

for which acts the humble petitioners shall remain  grateful to this Hon’ble Court.

5. A Single Bench of the High Court allowed the above writ  

petition  by  its  order  dated  20th September,  2007  with  the  

following directions :-

(1) The Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 shall ensure that  the Petitioner Nos. 2 to 16 are accommodated  appropriately in its unaided school, i.e.  Indian  School, within four weeks from today; the said  teachers shall be absorbed on permanent basis;  their  salary,  allowances  and  other  conditions  shall  be  preserved  with  continuity  of  service.  The arrears of 5% contribution for the last one  year, payable to the petitioner Nos.2 to 16, shall  be paid by the society within 6 weeks, to them.  This shall be over and above the Rs.1,00,000/-  amount volunteered to be paid by the society,  as a good will gesture to them. That amount too  shall be paid, if not already paid.

(2) Simultaneously, the said respondents shall take  steps  to  effectuate  their  statement  about  assimilating all the existing students (from the  aided  school  in  the  Tis  January  Lane)  in  the  Indian  school,  on  “freeship  basis”.  The  said  students  shall  not  be  required  to  pay  any  amount over and above what has been paid by  them all this while.

(3) The society and fourth respondent shall ensure  that the students of the aided school are given  free transportation to the unaided school,  and  back to the Tis January Lane area as long as  the students of  the aided school  study in the  

5

Indian school.  It shall do all things necessary  to meaningfully assimilate such children in the  Indian school.

(4) The  GNCT  shall  ensure  compliance  with  the  above directions; if necessary, it shall sanction  additional  sections,  wherever  required  in  the  unaided school,  to  accommodate  the  influx of  the students from the aided school as well  as  teachers  and  employees  from  there.   It  shall  continue to preserve and protect the status of  the  petitioner  employees  as  employees  of  an  aided school.

(5) A status report disclosing due compliance with  the above directions, and action taken in that  regard shall be filed within 6 weeks, before this  court, by the fourth and fifth respondents, and  GNCT.

6. Aggrieved by the above order the society preferred Letters  

Patent  Appeal  No.1307 of  2007 which  has  been as  noticed  

earlier dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court by  

the  order  impugned  in  this  petition  with  costs  assessed  at  

Rs.75,000/-.   

7. When  the  matter  came  up  before  this  Court  on  16th  

December,  2009,  Mr.  Desai,  learned  senior  counsel  for  the  

petitioners made a statement that the petitioner society was  

6

prepared to absorb all the students and the teachers employed  

for the school at Tis January Lane, New Delhi, from the next  

academic year, provided the students and the teachers were  

willing to join the petitioners-school.  Mr. Sen, learned counsel  

appearing  for  the  NDMC  was  also  granted  time  to  seek  

instructions as to whether the NDMC was prepared to absorb  

the teachers.   

8. Pursuant to the above direction, Mr.  Sen submitted at  

the  bar  that  while  the  NDMC  is  willing  to  accommodate  

students, who are not willing to join the Indian School of the  

petitioner  society  it  has no legal  obligation what  so  ever  to  

absorb  the  teachers  who  were  employed  by  the  petitioner  

society for running the school at Tis January Lane.  It was  

argued that since the teachers had themselves not prayed for  

any direction from the High Court for absorption in the service  

of NDMC, there was no question of issuing any direction to  

that  effect  especially  when  the  same  would  go  beyond  the  

prayer made in the writ  petition.  It  was submitted that the  

High Court had rightly concluded that the society was obliged  

7

not only to adjust the students but also the teachers employed  

in connection with the running of the school at Tis January  

Lane.  

9. There  is  in  our  opinion  considerable  merit  in  the  

submission of  Mr.  Sen.  The High Court  has after  a  careful  

consideration of the matter correctly held that the society was  

obliged  to  absorb  the  teachers  and  the  students  from  Tis  

January  Lane.  The view taken by the  High Court  does  not  

suffer  from  any  error  of  law  or  jurisdiction  to  warrant  

interference  by  this  Court  in  exercise  of  its  powers  under  

Article 136 of the Constitution. In fairness to Mr. Desai, we  

must mention that even he did not pursue the challenge to the  

orders passed by the High Court in so far as the same directs  

the society to adjust and absorb the students and teachers  

from the Tis January Lane school. All that Mr. Desai argued  

was that direction No.3 issued by the learned Single  Judge  

and  upheld  by  the  Division  Bench  of  the  High  Court  was  

totally  beyond the scope of  writ  petition inasmuch as there  

was neither any prayer in the petition regarding grant of free  

8

transportation to the students from Tis January Lane nor was  

there any legal justification for the issue of any such direction.  

He urged that this Court could delete the said direction and  

dispose of the present petition.  

10. Mr. Sen, learned counsel appearing for the NDMC had no  

objection to that course of action.  Even otherwise, we are of  

the  view  that  the  direction  regarding  free  transportation  to  

students from Tis January Lane to the Indian school does not  

have any contractual or other legal basis to support the same.  

According  to  the  petitioner  society  also  the  school  is  not  

providing any transportation to the students nor is there any  

obligation to do so. Be that as may be, whether or not free  

transport should be offered to students who may be adjusted  

in the Indian school was never the matter in issue before the  

High Court or in the writ petition filed by the teachers. The  

students  were  also  not  parties  to  the  proceedings  either  

individually or collectively.  That being the position, we are of  

the  view  that  direction  No.3  issued  by  the  learned  Single  

Judge and affirmed by the High Court needs to be deleted and  

9

is accordingly deleted. We may however clarify that this order  

would  not  prevent  the  students  from  seeking  appropriate  

redress in appropriate proceedings before the competent Court  

or authority and claiming free transportation to and fro Indian  

school  established  by  the  petitioner  society.  In  any  such  

proceedings  the  prayer  regarding  transportation  shall  be  

examined  uninfluenced  by  the  observations  made  in  this  

order.   Beyond the  modification  indicated  above  we  see  no  

reason what so ever to interfere with the orders passed by the  

High  Court.  The  petition  is,  with  the  above  observations,  

disposed of.  No costs.  

……………………………J. (J.M. PANCHAL)

……………………………J. (T.S. THAKUR)

New Delhi February 16, 2010

10