Showing posts with label Transfer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Transfer. Show all posts

Thursday, June 27, 2019

Arvind Sharma Vs. Dte of Education & Anr. | Case No. 840/1024/2019/04 /3078-3080 | Dated:26.06.2019




In the Court of the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital Territory of Delhi
25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005,
Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

Case No. 840/1024/2019/04 /3078-3080                   Dated:26.06.2019

In the matter of:

Sh. Arvind Sharma
Vice Principal (Rtrd.)
Residence-1/7133, Shivaji Park
Shahdara, Delhi-110032
Mobile No. 9911184413                                             
............Petitioner
                                                      Versus
The Director (Education),
Directorate of Education, GNCTD
Old Secretariate,
Delhi-110054                                                         ......Respondent No. 1

The Deputy Director of Education (North-East),
B-Block, Yamuna Vihar,
Delhi-110053                                                         ......Respondent No. 2

Date of Hearing: 25.06.2019
  Present:             Sh. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Complainant
Sh. Satpal Singh, DDE (NE) alongwith Mukul Manrai, ADE (NE) on behalf of Respondent
Dr. Sudhakar Gaikwad, Principal, Sh. Sushil Kumar Rai, TGT (Math) and Sh. Kartar Singh, Ministral Staff, GSBV, Khajoori Khas on behalf of Respondent

ORDER

The above named complainant, a person with 66% locomotor disability vide his email dated 03.04.2019 registered as a complaint under the Rights for Persons with Disability Act, 2016 hereinafter referred to as the Act, inter-alia alleged that he retired from service on 31.12.2018 on attaining the age of superannuation.  He was a bit strict on non-performing teachers.  They, in connivance with GSTA lodged false complaints against him. Consequently, he was transferred frequently.  His last transfer was from RSBV Gulabi Bagh (Distt. North) to GSBV Khajoori Khas (Distt. North East) just before 5 months of his superannuation.  He protested against his transfer with the Director of Education and this court but did not get any relief. 

2.     Subsequently, district North East did not issue his vigilance clearance report, although no case was pending against him.  Delay in releasing his retirement benefits was therefore wilful and to harass him.  The complainant therefore requested that his retiral benefits be released at the earliest and responsibility should be fixed for delay in issuing the vigilance clearance report at the District Level and his Re-employment case should also be processed.

3.     The complaint was taken up with the respondents vide letter dated 11.04.2019 followed by a reminder dated 23.04.2019.  As there was no response, a show cause-cum-hearing notice dated 24.05.2019 was issued and the respondents were directed to show cause why they should not make payment of retiral benefits to the complainant within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the notice and submit reasons for delay and the para-wise comments by 10.06.2019.  A hearing was also scheduled on 25.06.2019.

4.     During the hearing, Dy. Director of Education, Distt. North East vide letter dated 24.06.2019, submitted as under:
“Subject: Reply to Show-Cause-Cum-Hearing Notice dated 24.05.2019
Reference above, it is submitted that all payment of retiral benefits have been amde to Shri Arvind Sharma as per the details given below:
Serial Number
Retiral Benefit
Amount (Rupees)
Credited into the complainant’s account on (Date)
1
GPF Final Payment
2370036/-
16/05/2019
2
D.C.R.G
1466858/-
22/05/2019
3
Commutation of Pension
1769904/-
22/05/2019
4
Leave Encashment
981000/-
27/05/2019
5
UTGEIS
60983/-
27/05/2019

It is also informed that Sh. Arvind Sharma has been given re-employment vide Transfer Order dated 07/06/2019 and posted in Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya, Jafrabad, Delhi-110053.
It is humbly submitted that processing of retiral benefits started only after receipt of Vigilance Clearance Report by the School (Sarvodaya Bal Vidyalaya, Khajoori Khas, Delhi-110090) on 25/02/2019.  The delay in release of payment was due to sending back of filed to the school again and again to remove certain deficiencies.


(Satpal Singh)
Deputy Director of Education
District North East”

5.     The complainant reiterated his written submissions and added that he met all the concerned officers namely the Dy. Director, Special Director and Regional Director Education.  However, none of the officers considered his request and ensured release of retiral benefits in time.  He visited the Offices of Dy. Director, North East, Yamuna Vihar, Dr. Neeraj, 14 times.  But she did not make any effort to release the amount.

6.     It is observed that the retiral benefits on account of GPF Final Payment, D.C.R.G, Commutation of Pension, Leave Encashment and UTGEIS work out to Rs. 6648781/- which were supposed to be paid to the complainant by January, 2019.  Admittedly, there was no reason for delay in releasing the amount to the complainant.  An amount of more than Rs. 2.25 lakh would have accrued as interest on Rs. 66,48,781/- in the post office @ 8.25% for 5 months.

7.     In view of the above, it is recommended that respondent no. 1 should fix the responsibility for delaying the release of the retiral benefits to the complainant and explore the possibility of compensating him by recovering the amount from those who were responsible for causing such a huge loss to the complainant. 

8.     Action taken report be intimated to this court within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order as required under Section 81 of the Act.

9.     The complaint is disposed of.

10.   Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 26th day of June, 2019.



(T.D.Dhariyal)
State Commissioner of Person with Disabilities


Wednesday, March 14, 2018

Vivek Kumar, S/o Sh. Raj Pal Vs. Commissioner SDMC & Anr | Case No. 4/1336/2016-Wel./CD/6119-6121 | Dated: 13.03.2018




              In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital Territory of Delhi
25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]


Case No. 4/1336/2016-Wel./CD/6119-6121                     Dated: 13.03.2018

In the matter of:

Sh. Vivek Kumar, S/o Sh. Raj Pal
H.No. 414, Paprawat, 
Near C.R. Oasis Convenient School,
Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043                                        ................ Petitioner

                                          Versus   
The Commissioner,
South Delhi Municipal Corporation,
9th Floor, Dr. SPM Civic Centre,
J.L.N. Marg, New Delhi-110002                            ………...…Respondent No.1
         

The Commissioner,
East Delhi Municipal Corporation,
419, Udyog Sadan, Paparganj,
Industrial Area, Delhi-110096                                ………...…Respondent No.2


                             ORDER

The above named complainant with 80% locomotor disability filed a complaint dated 31.08.2016 regarding renewal of his contract as a primary education teacher in EDMC w.e.f. 01.07.2016.  He submitted that he was appointed against a reserved vacancy for persons with disabilities on merit.  He was transferred from EDMC to SDMC on his request due to his disability.  All the teachers appointed on contract basis with him in EDMC were re-appointed on 01 July, 2016.  However, his contract was not renewed though the vacancy is lying unfilled.

2.       The Complaint was taken up with respondent No. 1 (SDMC) on 31.08.2016 followed by reminders dated 07.10.16 and 15.11.16.  As no reply was received, a hearing was scheduled on 29.12.2016. 

3.       In the meantime vide letter dated 01.12.2016 SDMC informed that services of the complainant cannot be renewed as he was recruited during 2013 by EDMC.  SDMC had renewed contracts of those who had been recruited upto 31.10.2010.  The respondent also stated that if the complaint is considered, all the contract teachers would also have to be considered whereas the issue has already been decided by Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in the matter of Shanton V Tanwar Vs. SDMC.  Vide another reply dated 07.03.2017, SDMC submitted that the matter was also examined in connection with Law Department of SDMC who opined that contractual appointment of the complainant could not be extended.  The backlog vacancies have been referred to DSSSB for appointment to the post of primary teachers in the year 2009-10.  The selection process has not yet completed by the DSSSB.

4.       EDMC vide letter dated 14.12.2017 inter-alia submitted that as per circular No. D/894/ADC/Admin./HQ/13-14 dated 09.01.2014 no inter-corporation transfer of contractual teachers would be considered.  Despite this, keeping in view the difficulties being faced by the complainant in travelling from Nazafgarh to Shah(North), his case was considered and he was transferred to SDMC.  As the complainant is no longer an employee of the EDMC, EDMC has
ng the hearing the representative of EDMC submitted that the recomnothing to do with his re-engagement.  

5.       On 17.01.2018 durimendation is the ROP dated 27.12.2017 was submitted to the higher authority and there was no change in the decision that has already been communicated vide letter dated 14.12.2017. 

          The recommendation was made to EDMC because SDMC re-engaged contract teachers who were engaged up to 31.10.2010 whereas the complainant was engaged in the year 2013.  The complainant who was heard on telephone during the hearing, stated that he would make necessary arrangement for his stay near his place of posting if he is re-engaged and will not ask for transfer.

6. After a series of hearings on 20.09.2017,13.11.2017,14.12.2017and 17.01.2018, EDMC was advised vide record of proceedings dated 14.12.2017 and 18.01.2018 to consider the complainant for the post of primary teacher on contract basis against the vacant post until the post is  filled by a person with disability on regular basis since the complainant was appointed on contract by EDMC against the vacancy for persons with disabilities, which was still lying vacant and the contract appointees were still continuing in EDMC.

7.       He was advised to meet the Commissioner, EDMC and intimate its outcome to this court within 10 days.  On 18.01.2018, the complainant met the Commissioner, EDMC, who approved renewal of contract appointment of the complainant and he was posted at EDMC Primary School, Khajuri Khas-II on 25.01.2018.  EDMC vide letter dated  27.02.2018 informed that Sh. Vivek Kumar has been allowed to be engaged as a contract teacher in EDMC w.e.f. 25.01.2018 vide order No. D/2489/DDE/Admn./Edn./HQ/EDMC/18 dated 19.02.2018 which is a very positive step.

8.         In light of the positive action by Commissioner, EDMC, the complaint is disposed off.

9.       Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 9th day of March, 2018.  
   
                                                                            
                                                                                       (T.D. Dhariyal)
                     State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities


Wednesday, February 28, 2018

T.R. Sharma Vs. Commissioner North Delhi Municipal Corporation | Case No. 13/1022/2017/10/5859-60 | Dated: 27.02.2018




In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital Territory of Delhi
25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

Case No. 13/1022/2017/10/5859-60                             Dated: 27.02.2018

In the matter of:

Sh. T.R. Sharma
JSA (LDC), Education Department
Civil Lines Zone, Delhi-110054                                ................ Complainant

                                          Versus                          
The Commissioner
North Delhi Municipal Corporation
Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre
New Delhi-110002                                                 ………...…Respondent


ORDER
         
          The above named complainant, a person with visual impairment filed a complaint dated 23.10.2017 in which he alleged that he was transferred from Civil Line Zone to Keshav Puram Zone which is far away from his home. 
2.      The complaint was taken up with the respondent on 30.10.2017 followed by hearing notice dated 18.11.2017.  In the mean time,s a reply was received from the respondent vide letter No. AC/A.S.O-IV/CED/NDMC/2017 dated 21.12.2017.  As per the said letter, the grievance of the complainant about his posting has been considered by the North DMC and he has been retained in Education/CLZ vide office order No. S.O-I/CED/NDMC/2017/2735 Dated 27.11.2017. 

3.      The above reply was forwarded to the complainant on 12.01.2018 with advice to submit his comments, if any, within 10 days failing which the matter would be treated as closed.

2.      No communication from the complainant has been received till date. Accordingly, the complainant is closed and disposed off.

3.     Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 27th day of February, 2017.     

                                                                                          (T.D. Dhariyal)
                          State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities


Sunday, December 17, 2017

P.S. Dhama Vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr | Case No. 4/1348/2016-Wel./CD/3366-68 | Dated:16.12.2017




In the Court of Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital Territory of Delhi
25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
Phone-23216002-04, Telefax: 23216005
[Vested with power of Civil Court under the Persons with Disability (Equal Opportunity, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995]

Case No. 4/1348/2016-Wel./CD/3366-68                                    Dated:16.12.2017

In the matter of:

Sh. P.S. Dhama,
President, Joint Front of PwD & OBC Teacher’s Association Delhi,
G-63, MCD Colony Dhaka, Kingsway Camp,
New Delhi-110009                                                                 ……… Complainant     
                                                                     
Versus
The Commissioner,
North Delhi Municipal Corporation,
4th Floor, SPMC Civic Centre,
New Delhi-110002                                                                      ....…Respondent

The Director,
Central Establishment Department,
North Delhi Municipal Corporation,
Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre,
New Delhi -110002.                                                                     ........Respondent

            
ORDER
       
                  The above named complainant, a person with 40 % locomotor disability vide his complaint dated 19.07.2016 submitted that he is working as Principal in School of North Delhi Municipal Corporation (North DMC).  He was transferred out under some conspiracy on 03.11.2015.  The entire staff and parents requested for cancellation of his transfer.  However, the then Dy.Director(Education) relieved him on 04.12.2015 and suspended him without giving him any opportunity.  He was again suddenly transferred on 18.07.2017 and was relieved on the same day. He further submitted that he is entitled to be transferred to a place close to his house as per the instructions. However, he was being discriminated against and harassed.  He also submitted that he had filed a complaint before the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities and this Court as his grievances were not redressed by the senior officers of  MCD.  Because of his complaint, the Corporation had to fill the back log of reserved vacancies in the post of Principal.  He also alleged discrimination in the matter of look after charge and Current Duty Charge on the ground of his disability.   He requested that his relieving order dated 18.08.2016 should be set aside. 

2.               The complaint was taken up with the respondent vide communication dated 05.08.2016 followed by reminders dated 10.10.2016 and 29.11.2016.  The respondent submitted an Interim Report on 05.11.2016 and stated that on the basis of complaints of two female teachers, a memo dated 29.06.2016 was issued to the complainant.  After considering the facts of the matter, the competent authority ordered his transfer immediately to a boys school.  He was therefore, transferred and relieved to MCPS Wazirpur Industrial Area, C-II vide order dated 18.07.2016.  The complainant was suspended on 04.01.2016 for disobedience of official orders, misconduct and obstruction of official work while working as Principal in MCPS Dheerpur.  He was later on reinstated and posted in MCPS, Parmanand Colony on 14.01.2016.  As regards his promotion to the post of School Inspector,  the respondent submitted that it was in the ambit of Central Establishment Department / North DMC.  All his representations were forwarded to DDE(Admn.) Education Deptt., North DMC for further necessary action. The said post is a Group A Post.

3.               The respondent vide letter dated 14.02.2017 added that the Look After Charge (LAC) of School Inspectors is purely a temporary arrangement to deal with the shortfall of school Inspectors for the smooth functioning of the Department. Under the North DMC, the charge of LAC has been assigned to senior most eligible headmasters as all the School Inspectors-LAC working with North DMC are senior  Headmasters than the complainant.  The EDMC or SDMC have their own arrangement. Seniority of Headmasters of three DMCs is common and is being finalized.  As regards request of the complainant for transfer to EDMC, the same is done on mutual basis which  was under the jurisdiction of Director Local Bodies. The respondent further informed that a departmental enquiry was pending against the complainant and his promotion to the post of SI can be considered only after the enquiry in the case is over and the RRs to the post are notified.

4.               A copy of the reply of the respondent was sent to the complainant vide letter dated 06.03.2017 at his address – G-63, MCD Colony Dhaka, Kingsway Camp, New Delhi followed by  reminder dated 02.08.2017 vide which he was advised to  submit his comments if any, by 10.08.2017 failing which the case would  be closed. Till date no response whatsoever has been received from the complainant.  In view of this, the complaint is closed.

                  Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 13th day  of December, 2017.     



           (T.D. Dhariyal )
                                                            Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities









Friday, November 24, 2017

Sanyogeeta Vs. Secretary Deptt of Health & Family Welfare | Case No. 4/1133/2015-Wel./CD/3206-07 | Dated: 23.11.2017



In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital Territory of Delhi
25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi-2
Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005, Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]

Case No. 4/1133/2015-Wel./CD/3206-07                                        Dated: 23.11.2017

In the matter of:

Ms. Sanyogeeta,
H.No.501, Nangal Thakran,
Delhi-110039                                                                                       .……… Complainant
    
                                                                          Versus
The Secretary.
Deptt. of Health and Family Welfare,
9th Level, Delhi Secretariat,
I.P. Estate, New Delhi.                                                                          …...…Respondent
 
ORDER

                 The above named complainant who claimed to be a person with disability vide her complaint received on 06.10.2015 submitted that she was selected as Staff Nurse.  She was asked to join Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, GNCT of Delhi which is 25-30 Kms. away.  Due to her disability it is difficult for her to travel to the office every day.  She requested that she may be transferred to a nearby hospital i.e. Maharishi Balmiki Hospital.
 
2.         The complaint was taken up with the respondent vide communication dated 12.10.2015 and a hearing was held on 26.11.2016.

3.               The respondent vide letter dated 02.11.2015 informed that it was not possible to transfer her at that stage. However, her request can be considered in future.  As the complainant did not pursue her case for long, she was contacted on telephone and she informed that she has been transferred as per her request and requested to close her case. Accordingly, the complaint is closed.

4.         Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 23rd  day of November,2017.     



           (T.D. Dhariyal )
                                             State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities