1. Introduction:

The Supreme Court adjudicated on appeals filed by the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) against the Delhi High Court's common judgment dated December 9, 2009. The case revolved around the illegal closure of Khalsa Boys Primary School and the subsequent liability for compensating the affected staff.

2. Background and Facts:

The DSGMC managed Khalsa Boys Primary School located at Gurudwara Bangla Sahib, New Delhi. Due to the dilapidated condition of the school building and increasing difficulties in managing the school, DSGMC decided to relocate it to Mata Sundari College, New Delhi. The school was receiving 95% of its funding from NDMC, and the relocation proposal was challenged by the school's staff in the Delhi High Court.

3. Controversy and Legal Proceedings:

Despite an ex-parte stay order from the Delhi High Court, DSGMC partially demolished the school, leading NDMC to withdraw funding under Rule 69 of the Delhi Education Act and Rules, 1973. The High Court directed NDMC to reconsider the school’s closure and ruled against the DSGMC for demolishing the school without proper approval. The Court also directed DSGMC to pay salaries and benefits to the affected staff.

4. High Court’s Judgment:

The Delhi High Court ruled that DSGMC’s closure of the school was illegal and ordered NDMC to bear the burden of the staff's pay and benefits. However, NDMC was granted the right to seek reimbursement from DSGMC.

5. Supreme Court’s Decision:

The Supreme Court dismissed DSGMC's appeals and upheld the High Court's judgment, emphasizing that DSGMC's actions were illegal and that NDMC was justified in withdrawing the grant. The Court directed NDMC to pay the remaining dues, including interest, to the staff within eight weeks and confirmed NDMC's right to seek reimbursement from DSGMC.

6. Key Legal Points:

• Rule 46 of Delhi Education Rules: Closure of a recognized school requires prior approval from the Director (Education), which DSGMC failed to obtain.
• Liability for Compensation: DSGMC, having acted outside the law, was held liable for compensating the school staff, with NDMC being directed to ensure payment and seek reimbursement.

7. Conclusion:

The Supreme Court’s ruling clarified the legal responsibilities surrounding the closure of educational institutions and reinforced the obligations of managing bodies like DSGMC to adhere to statutory requirements before making unilateral decisions affecting public interests.