VIMLA SINGH EX PGT HISTORY vs COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGHATHAN

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 18.02.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 25.02.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 25.02.2026 + W.P.(C) 14081/2023 VIMLA SINGH EX PGT HISTORY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. P. V. Singh and Mr. Ashok Kumar Panigrahi, Adv. versus COMMISSIONER KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGHATHAN .....Respondent Through: Mr. S. Rajappa, Mr.R. Gowrishankar and Ms. G. Dhivyasri, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.: 1. Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the Impugned Orders dated 30.05.2023 and 17.07.2023 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Orders‟] passed in O.A. No.81/2018 and R.A. No.97/2023, respectively, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as „the Tribunal‟], whereby her claim for gratuity came to be rejected. The Petitioner further challenges the correctness of the Tribunal‟s view in declining to examine the validity of Rule 26 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 [hereinafter referred to as „CCSP Rules‟], Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN W.P.(C) 14081/2023 Signing Date:25.02.2026 16:04:38 Page 1 of 10 which, according to her, was erroneously treated as determinative of her entitlement. 2. The solitary issue which arises for consideration is whether the Petitioner, having resigned from service, is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 [hereinafter referred to as „the PG Act‟], or whether her claim stands defeated by virtue of Rule 26 of the CCSP Rules, which provides for forfeiture of past service upon resignation. FACTUAL MATRIX: 3. In order to appreciate the controversy, it is neces