W.P.(C) 14368/2025 $~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14368/2025 & CM APPLs. 58824-58825/2025 JAIN BHARATI MRIGAVATI VIDYALAYA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kanwar S.N., Mr. Hitesh, Advocates. versus MS MEENA CHAUHAN & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kamlesh Kumar, Ms. Tripta K., Advocates for R-1. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, ASC with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Ms. Vishruti Pandey, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R % 25.09.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner – Jain Bharati Mrigavati Vidyalaya challenges the judgment dated 18.08.2025 passed by the Delhi School Tribunal, whereby the order dated 05.10.2023 terminating the services of respondent No. 1 - Ms. Meena Chauhan, was set aside. 2. Mr. Kanwar S.N., learned counsel for the petitioner, states that an application has been filed, inter alia, seeking permission to proceed in terms of Rule 115(4) of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 [“DSEAR”]. Although the application [CM APPL. _____/2025 (to be numbered) is not on record, a copy has been handed over in Court and is taken on record. The Registry is directed to number this application. This application is accordingly taken on Board. 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 27/09/2025 at 11:51:52 W.P.(C) 14368/2025 3. Rule 115(4) of DSEAR provides that, whenever an order imposing penalties of dismissal, removal, or compulsory retirement from service imposed upon an employee is set aside or rendered void by a Court or Tribunal, and the disciplinary authority decides to hold further inquiry against the employee on the same allegation, the employee shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension from the date of the original order of dismissal and will remain under suspension until the final order. 4. In the present case, the case of respondent No. 1 before the Tribunal was that her services had been terminated without following the procedure of law inasmuch as she was not issued a chargesheet, no proper disciplinary action committee was constituted, and no disciplinary inquiry was held. 5. In these circumstances, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, submits that if a fresh inquiry is to be conducted against her, she must be treated as being under suspension from the date of the termination and subsistence allowance may be paid accordingly. 6. Mr. Kanwar states that the petitioner is also agreeable to such a direction. 7. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions: A. In the event the petitioner - School intends to conduct disciplinary proceedings against the respondent No. 1, it will issue a chargesheet to her in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from today. B. In such an eventuality, respondent No. 1 will be treated as having 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 27/09/2025 at 11:51:52 W.P.(C) 14368/2025 been on deemed suspension from the date of the impugned order of termination, i.e., 05.10.2023. C. Respondent No. 1 will be paid arrears of subsistence allowance computed in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks, and will continue to be paid subsistence allowance at the applicable rates until conclusion of the inquiry proceedings. D. In the event the petitioner decides not to institute disciplinary proceedings, the order of the Tribunal will be given effect after lapse of period of four weeks from today. 8. All pending applications also stand disposed of. PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 25, 2025 ‘Bhupi/JM’/ 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 27/09/2025 at 11:51:52