Delhi High Court – Orders
Rani Sethi vs Director Of Education And Ors on 10 March, 2026
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 46/2012
RANI SETHI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Avneesh Garg and Mr. Bharat
Bhushan Sethi, Advocates.
versus
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Puneet Singh Bindra, Ms. Kriti
Dang, Mr. Chandra Raj Singh,
Advocates for R-2 & R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
ORDER
% 10.03.2026
1. Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed on
behalf of the Petitioner Rani Sethi, for directing Respondents to grant
second up-gradation in ACP with arrears w.e.f. 15.10.2000; revision of pay
scale with arrears as per 6th CPC recommendations; revise the fixation of
pension and gratuity with arrears to revise the pay scale of the Petitioner as
on 31.05.2008; pay a compound interest @ 12% per annum on retrial as well
as other dues from the date of its being due till actual payment; and for
setting aside of Order dated 14.12.2011 passed by Respondent No.3 /
Principal, Sant Nirankari Girls Sr. Sec. School, Sant Nirankari Colony,
Delhi.
2. Brief facts are that Petitioner Rani Sethi joined Respondent No.3, a
recognized aided School under Respondent No.1 / Directorate of Education
on 15.10.1976. She was granted senior scale in the grade and scale of 1400-
2600 in the year 1989. In July, 2007, on inspection of the her leave account,
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
she discovered it to be tampered and interpolated with over writings. She
filed a Complaint on 04.10.2007, in this regard to the SHO, PS: Mukherjee
Nagar. On 31.05.2008, she filed CC No.630/2007 in the Court of learned
CMM, wherein the Application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was allowed.
Matter is being investigated by the local police and the Chargesheet is yet to
be filed.
3. In September, 2009, being aggrieved by non-payment of her terminal
dues and also the benefits of arrears of 6th CPC and ACP, Petitioner filed
W.P.(C)11511/2009 before this Court, claiming compound interest @ 12%
per annum as well as the cost.
4. Respondents filed Counter Reply on 19.03.2010, whereby an
information sent by the Principal to the Education officer on 19.03.2010,
was appended, whereby it was acknowledged that a photocopy of Service
Book, provided to the School by the Police, has been in their possession. On
16.08.2010, Nirankari School Authorities responded to the RTI moved by
the Petitioner by appending the Minutes of the Meeting, whereby the
employees had been considered for grant of benefits of ACP. In regard to
the Petitioner, the consideration was not made due to non-availability of the
Service Book, as the same was in custody of the Police.
5. This Court, vide Order dated 19.04.2011, disposed of
W.P.(C)11511/2009 filed by the Petitioner, with the direction to the
respondents to consider the representation to be preferred by the Petitioner
pertaining to her subsisting grievances.
6. The Petitioner preferred Representation to the Respondents on
25.04.2011, which was followed by reminders. Between May, June and
September, 2011, Respondents paid gratuity, pension and also allowed
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
commutation except leave salary, regarding which the investigation was
pending, to the Petitioner. However, ACP arrears, 6th CPC arrears, revision
of the retrial benefits with arrears were still not paid without any
justification.
7. Petitioner again preferred Representation on 22.11.2011, seeking
grant of other benefits as described above, with interest. Respondent, by
Order dated 14.12.2011, informed the Petitioner that Second ACP has
already been recommended to her in the pay scale of 6500-10500 w.e.f.
15.10.2000; however, the same has been kept in abeyance, awaiting
outcome of the Criminal Case.
8. Petitioner claimed that the School Authorities as well as Education
Department being modal employer, are not allowed to approbate and
reprobate simultaneously. Despite being in possession of the photocopy of
the Service Book of the Petitioner, withholding of retrial dues and
entitlements arisen in the past, on the ground of non-availability of Service
Book, amounts to withholding the benefits of a retiree without any just and
sufficient cause.
9. The payment of ACP arrears and the arrears of 6th CPC do not require
the original copy of the Service Book, as number of years of service and
factum of continuance in service is the only criteria to consider and grant
these benefits. When a legitimate earned benefit of an employee is withheld
without any justification, it entails levy of interest on the disbursing
Authority, as per trite law. Hence, the aforesaid reliefs have been sought.
10. Respondent No.1 in its Counter Affidavit, had made preliminary
submission that Petitioner had filed Criminal Case alleging tampering of her
Service Book, which is pending before learned MM. Major benefits due to
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
the Petitioner, have already been paid to her. Remaining due can only be
assessed once the Criminal Case is decided in regard to tampering of the
Service Book of the Petitioner. All other averments made in the Petitioner
are denied.
11. Reliance is placed on Govt. of NCT of Delhi through Chief Secretary
and Anr. vs. Prem Nath Manchanda, 2018 lawsuit(del) 6114 and Govt. of
NCT of Delhi vs. Sh. S. K. Sharma, 2017 lawsuit(del) 6477, wherein, interest
@ 18% per annum was granted to the Respondent.
12. Respondent No.3 has filed its Counter Affidavit, wherein it has
been submitted that present Writ Petition is not maintainable and is gross
abuse of process of law. Petitioner, as per her own submissions, had filed a
Criminal Case against the Principal, Vice Principal, clerical Staff and certain
teachers of the School, wrongly alleging that they had tampered her Service
Book and had reduced her Medical Leave balance, to Nil. As per her own
showing, the dispute regarding difference in her Medical Leaves, has been
raised by herself. The decision in respect of the said Leaves, has a decisive
impact on the grant of ACP, as the date of implementation of the ACP
depends on the Service period as well as the balance in the Leaves Account
of the employee. The DPC had thus, directed the school authorities and
management to decide the date of grant of ACP, after the settlement of the
issue regarding her Medical Leaves, which can be done only when the
Police authorities, after due investigations, arrive at some decision on the
allegations of tampering in the Petitioner’s Service Book.
13. Respondent, vide Letter dated 14.12.2011, had merely informed the
Petitioner about the above-mentioned decision of the DPC and the said
Letter was not an Order and as such, can neither be challenged nor the
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
prayer seeking its setting aside, can be allowed.
14. Petitioner cannot be allowed to take advantage of her own acts of
omission and commission and her own wrongs. The delay, in processing of
the pensionary benefits of the Petitioner, was only due to the Service Book
having been seized by the Police, for conducting investigations. Delay
therefore, cannot be thrusted upon the answering Respondent.
15. In the earlier W.P.(C)11511/2009, Respondents had not only made
the aforesaid submissions, but had also explained that there was no delay on
the part of the School Authorities. Vide Order dated 19.04.2011, Writ was
disposed of with the directions to Respondent that the submissions of the
Petitioner may be considered and pensionary benefit of the Petitioner, be
calculated, while other directions were issued to Respondent No.1 /
Directorate of Education in regard to grant of pensionary and other retiral
benefits, to the Petitioner.
16. In compliance of the Order dated 19.04.2011, the arrears of pension
and retirement gratuity have been granted in the year 2011. Therefore, the
delay, if any, in granting retiral benefits, was not due to ill act on the part of
Respondent No.3 and therefore, no interest can be granted to the Petitioner.
17. It is further submitted that another W.P.(CRL) 504/2005 leveling
allegations against few Teachers working in the School, about having been
appointed on fake certificates of Educational and other Qualifications, was
filed by the Petitioner. Investigations in the said allegations revealed that the
Certificates of those teachers were genuine and no FIR was registered.
18. Being frustrated, Petitioner, in the year 2006, again filed W.P.(CRL)
171/2006, wherein she made allegations nearly against all the teachers
including the Principal and Vice Principal, having been appointed on the
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
basis of fake Certificates. The case was handed over/transferred to the EOW
Cell and this Court issued directions to investigate into the allegations made
by the Petitioner. EOW Cell conducted investigations, but found that none
of the Certificate was fake and no FIR was registered. Writ Petition was
finally disposed of, on 21.07.2008.
19. It is claimed that Petitioner has been making similar false and
frivolous Complaints one after the other, against Principal, Vice Principal,
clerical staff and teacher. Present Petition suffers from laches and is liable to
be dismissed.
20. On merit, all the allegations made in the Petition have been denied.
Submission heard and record perused.
21. Petitioner was aggrieved by her retiral benefits, gratuity and arrears
due to grant of Second upgradation in ACP, not being paid by Respondents.
However, it is not denied that those retiral benefits and other dues have now
been paid to the Petitioner. Only grievance of the Petitioner remains in
respect of grant of interest on the delayed payment, which she has claimed
to be granted to her, as compound interest @ 12% per annum.
22. Learned counsel for the Respondent has opposed this claim of the
Petitioner for grant of interest on the ground that delay, if any, was only
because was original Service Book was seized by Police, in an FIR
registered on Petitioner’s Complaint. In absence of her Service Book, the
arrears could not be released, which however, stand released in toto. It is
claimed that because there was no willful default on the part of the
Respondents, they are not liable to pay any interest on the delayed payment.
23. Only short question for consideration is whether the Petitioner is
entitled to interest on delayed release of arrears towards pension, gratuity
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
and ACP etc.
24. Supreme Court in the case of Prem Kumar vs. Indian Road
Constructions Committee and Anr., (2007) 98 DRJ 546 and Roshan Lal and
Ors. vs. DTC, (2007) 140 DLT 49, held that whenever an amount is illegally
withheld by a party, interest is payable thereon, to the other side, on the
simple logic that the person is entitled to receive the said amount of which
he has been wrongfully deprived, to his detriment. In case of such wrongful
withholding of money, the party must be restituted by payment of interest on
the principal sum, due and payable.
25. Likewise, Apex Court in the case of Uma Agrawal (Dr) vs. State of
U.P., (1999) 3 SCC 438, observed that grant of pension is not a bounty, but
the right of the retired Government employee and delay in settlement of
retiral benefits is frustrating and must be avoided, at all cost. It was further
observed in that case that the Petitioner retired on 30.04.1993, though the
arrears were released only after Interim Order was passed by Supreme Court
on 12.02.1996, in the Writ Petition. Respondents woke up only then and
started sending messages to various places, where the Petitioner had worked.
Such an exercise should have been started two years before the retirement.
26. Similarly, in the case of State of Kerala vs. M. Padmanabhan Nair,
(1985) 1 SCC 429, Supreme Court granted interest @ 6% per annum on the
pension and gratuity due to the Respondent by observing that:
“…duty was cast on the District Treasury Officer to grant every
retiring Government employee, Last Pay Certificate, which had
been delayed by the concerned Officer, for which there was no
justification of explanation.”
27. Similarly, in the case of S. K. Dua vs. State of Haryana, (2008) 3 SCC
44, Supreme Court granted interest on the delay payments.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
28. There is no denial in the present case that the arrears of POA and
pension had been granted after a delay of about 15-16 years, while gratuity
and commuted pension had been released after about 35 months. The only
ground given is that Petitioner’s Service Book was not available, which
cannot be considered as justiciable ground. It was for the Respondents to
have acted with promptitude to release such retirement benefits, which in
fact, are the lifeline for survival of a person, who retires from the service.
29. Delay in release of the terminal benefits is, in fact deprivation of the
right of survival of the Petitioner, under Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution of India. As has been held in the aforesaid judgements, it is
held that the Petitioner has a legitimate claim for interest, on the
delayed payment.
30. The last question for consideration is the rate at which interest be
granted to the Petitioner.
31. Article 65(1) of the Central Service (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides
for interest on delayed payment of gratuity, pension and family pension. It
provides that in case, family pension, provisional gratuity are delayed
beyond the date when its payment becomes due and the delay is attributable
to the administrative reasons or lapses, interest shall be paid as applicable to
General Provident Fund amount, in accordance with the instructions issued
from time to time.
32. Further, Article 65(5)(a) states that where a Government servant
retires on superannuation, interest shall be paid from the date following the
date of expiry of a period of three months from the date of retirement upto
the date of payment of arrears of pension or gratuity or both.
33. From these Rules, it is evident that any delay beyond the period of
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
three months in payment of pension, gratuity or arrears of pension, the
interest as may be notified, is payable.
34. The GPF Rate of Interest since 2008 till 2023 has varied between
8.8% to 7.1%. Thus, on an average, the rate of interest, which would be
equitable is calculated @8% p.a. simple interest, which is hereby, awarded
to the Petitioner.
35. It is hereby, directed the said calculation be made and the amount be
released to the Petitioner, within six weeks.
36. With the aforesaid directions, Writ Petition along with pending
Applications is disposed of.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
MARCH 10, 2026/R
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/03/2026 at 20:40:28
