Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

GIVE DETAILS OF HOW RTE ACT, 2009 LAW ON EWS ADMISSIONS WAS IMPLEMENTED - DELHI H C ASKS DELHI GOVT

Expand Messages
  • Ashok Agarwal
    NOTE Delhi High Court (A.K.Sikri ACJ & Rajeev Sahai Endlaw J) today issued notice to the Government of Delhi on a PIL filed by Social Jurist through Advocates
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 30, 2011
    • 0 Attachment





      NOTE

       

      Delhi High Court (A.K.Sikri ACJ & Rajeev Sahai Endlaw J) today issued notice to the Government of Delhi on a PIL filed by Social Jurist through Advocates Ashok Agarwal and Khagesh Jha highlighting serious violations of RTE Act, 2009 regarding admission of children belonging to disadvantage group and economically weaker sections under 25% reserved category in the academic year 2011-2012 by large number of unaided recognized private schools of Delhi and the Government has failed to take any action against the erring schools. It was also highlighted that the Government has not established a District Admission Monitoring Committee in each district as required under Clause 7 of the EWS Admission Order of 07.01.2011.

       

      The High Court while adjourning the hearing to 21.12.2011 directed the Government to file a report within 2 weeks detailing the steps having been taken by it to implement and to monitor the provisions relating to admission of children belonging to DG & EWS under 25% reserved category.

       

      Ashok Agarwal, Advocate

      30.11.2011

      M-09811101923

       

       

       

       

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

       

      W.P. (C) NO.   8434 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ OF 2011

       

      (PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)

       

       

      IN THE MATTER OF:  

                                    

       

      Public interest litigation

       

      AND

       

      IN THE MATTER OF:     

                                 

       

      Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India;

      AND

      IN THE MATTER OF:                                

      Failure on the part of Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Respondent herein, to implement the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 in regard to admission and free ship of children belonging to weaker sections in unaided recognized private schools of Delhi to the extent of 25% in entry level class;

      AND

      IN THE MATTER OF

      Failure on the part of the Government of NCT of Delhi to establish a District Admission Monitoring Committee (DAMC) in each district in terms of Clause 7 of Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011

      AND

      IN THE MATTER OF:    

      Many unaided private schools have not admitted any child under EWS category, many unaided private schools have admitted only partially the children under EWS Category and many  unaided private schools have denied admission to large number of children under EWS Category in the academic  year 2011-12 by adopting a device by reducing the number of seats/admissions at entry level class in breach of Clause 4(b) Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011  thereby defeating the beneficial provisions of Right of Children to Fee and Compulsory Education Act, 2009;

      AND

      IN THE MATTER OF:                                                            

      Violation of fundamental rights to education of the children belonging to disadvantaged group and to weaker sections as guaranteed to them under Articles 14, 15, 21, 21-A and 38 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions  of  Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009;

      AND

      IN THE MATTER OF:       

                              

      (1)     Constitution of India;

      (2)     Right of Children to Free and Compulsory

      Education Act, 2009;

      (3)     Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to

      Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group)

      Order, 2011

            

      AND

      IN THE MATTER OF

      Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group,

      Through Co-ordinator

      Advocate M.N. Singh,

      478-479, Lawyers’ Chambers,

      Western Wing, Tis Hazari Courts,

      Delhi-110054

      and having its Registered Office at

      Registered Office at C-29, Janyug Apartments,

      Sector-14 Extension,

      Rohini, Delhi-110085                                              .....  Petitioner                                                                    

                                                            

      Versus

       

       

      Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi,

      Through  Chief Secretary,

      Delhi Secretariat,

      I.P. Estate,

      New Delhi-110 002                                              …. Respondent

       

       

      To

      THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF HIGH COURT

      OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI  AND HIS COMPANION

      JUSTICES OF THE SAID HIGH COURT

       

      The humble petition of the petitioner above named

      MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

       

      1.       The petitioner submits that it has no personal interest in the litigation and that the petition is not guided by self gain or for gain of any other person/institution/body and that there is no motive other than of public interest in filing the present writ petition.

       

      2.       The petitioner submits that it is very much involved in the matter of implementation of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and has been frequently interacting with the education authorities of Govt. of NCT of Delhi and the source of averments made in the present writ petition is his personal knowledge as well as based on information having been received under RTI Act, 2005.

       

      3.       The petitioner submits that the present PIL is for the benefit of the children belonging to economically weaker sections and disadvantaged groups and they are incapable of assessing the courts themselves.

       

      4.       The petitioner submits that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi is likely to be affected by the orders sought in the writ petition and which has been impleaded as Respondent.  The petitioner says that to its knowledge, no other persons/ bodies/institutions are likely to be affected by the Order sought in the writ petition. 

       

      5.       Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group, the petitioner herein, is an organization of lawyers and social activists dedicated to the cause of common man and particularly to the rights of the children relating to education and health.  Advocate M.N. Singh is the Coordinator of the petitioner/organization and is authorized and competent to file and prosecute the present writ petition on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner is an organization having Registered Office at C-29, Janyug Apartments, Sector-14 Extension, Rohini, Delhi-110085. It is submitted that Advocates Kusum Sharma, Advocate Anuj Aggarwal and Advocate Rohini Aggarwal are the President, Secretary and Treasurer respectively of the petitioner/organization.  The petitioner submits that it has the means to pay costs, if any, imposed by this Hon’ble Court and submits it’s undertaking to this Hon’ble Court in that regard.

       

      6.       The petitioner by the present PIL has highlighted the fact the Government of NCT of Delhi has failed to establish a District Admission Monitoring Committee (DAMC) in each district as required under Clause 7 of Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011. The petitioner has also highlighted that a large number of unaided recognized private schools of Delhi have failed to provide admission to the children belonging to disadvantaged group and children belonging to economically weaker sections to the extent of 25% as required under the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 at the entry level in the academic year 2011-12 and the Govt. of NCT of Delhi has failed to take any action against such erring schools. It is submitted that many unaided private schools have not admitted any child under EWS category at the entry level class, many unaided private schools  have admitted  only partially  under EWS category  and many unaided schools denied admission to large number of children under EWS Category in the academic year 2011-12 by adopting a device by reducing the number of seats/admissions at entry level class to defeat the beneficial provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. It is submitted that the impugned failures on the part of the Govt. of NCT of Delhi is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unfair, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14, 15, 21, 21-A and 38 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and further read with Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011

       

      7.       The facts of the case so far as relevant for  purposes of the present writ petition are given in brief as under.

       

      8.       The petitioner submits that Article 21-A has been inserted in the Constitution of India by the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002 in December, 2002 which  came into force from 01.04.2010.  As a follow up legislation, the Parliament of India enacted Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 which also came into force w.e.f. 01.04.2010.

       

      9.       The petitioner invites attention of this Hon’ble Court to the relevant provisions of Section 2 (d), Section 2(e) and Section 12 of the Right of  Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 which are reproduced as under:-

       

      2 (a)  “child belonging to disadvantaged group” means a child belonging to the Scheduled Caste, the Scheduled Tribe, the socially and educationally backward class or such other group having disadvantage owing to social, cultural, economical, geographical, linguistic, gender or such other factor, as may be specified by the appropriate Government, by notification;     

       

      2(b)   “child belonging to weaker section” means a child belonging to such parent or guardian whose annual income is lower than the minimum limit specified  by the appropriate Government, by notification;

       

      Section 12. Extent of school’s responsibility for free and compulsory education.--

       

      (1)     For the purposes of this Act, a school,--

      (a)     specified in sub-clause (i) of clause (n) of section 2 shall provide free and compulsory elementary education to all children admitted therein;

       

      (b)     specified in sub-clause (ii) of clause (n) of section 2 shall provide free and compulsory elementary education to such proportion of children admitted therein as its annual recurring aid or grants so received bears to its annual recurring expenses, subject to a minimum of twenty-five per cent.;

       

      (c)      specified in sub-clause (iii) and (iv) of clause (n) of section 2 shall admit in class I, to the extent of at least twenty-five per cent. of the strength of that class, children belonging to weaker section and disadvantaged group in the neighborhood and provide free and compulsory elementary education till its completion:

       

      (2)     The school specified in sub-clause (n) of section 2 providing free and compulsory elementary education as specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall be reimbursed expenditure so incurred by it to the extent of per-child-expenditure incurred by the State, or the actual amount charged form the child, whichever is less, in such manner as may be prescribed.

       

      Provided that such reimbursement shall not exceed per-child-expenditure incurred by a school specified in sub-clause (i) of clause (n) of section 2:

       

      Provided further that where such school is already under obligation to provide free education to a  specified number of children on account of it having received any land, building, equipment or other facilities, either free of cost or at a concessional rate, such school shall not be entitled for reimbursement to the extent of such obligation. 

       

      (3)     Every school shall provide such information as may be required by the appropriate Government or the local authority, as the case may be.”

       

      The petitioner also invites attention of this Hon’ble Court to para 4 of the Statement of Objects and Reasons bringing the afore-mentioned legislation which is also reproduced as under:-

       

      “4. The proposed legislation is anchored in the belief that the values of equality, social justice and democracy and the creation of a just and humane society can be achieved only through provision of inclusive elementary education to all.  Provision of free and compulsory education of satisfactory quality to children from disadgangtaged and weaker sections is, therefore not merely the responsibility of schools run or supported by the appropriate Governments, but also of schools which are not dependent on Government funds.”

       

       

      10.     The petitioner submits that in terms of the afore-mentioned provisions of Section 12 read with Sections 2(d) and Section 2(d) of the RTE Act, 2009, all the unaided recognized private schools are under an obligation to provide admission in Class I, to the extent at least 25%  of the strength of that class, children belonging to weaker sections and disadvantaged group in the neighbourhood and provide free and compulsory elementary education till its completion and whereas a school imparts pre school education, the school is under an obligation to admit such children to such pre- school.  In other words, all the unaided recognized private schools are under an obligation to grant admission to the extent of 25% to the children belonging to disadvantaged group and children belonging to economically weaker sections at the entry level class.

       

      11.     The petitioner submits that in order to give effect to the afore-mentioned provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, the Government of NCT of Delhi notified Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011(In short, EWS Order of 2011).

      A true copy of the said Order dated 07.01.2011 is enclosed hereto as Annexure A.

       

      12      The petitioner submits that after issuance of the aforesaid EWS Order of 2011, the process of admissions in this category started in the academic year 2011-12. It is respectfully submitted that Government of NCT of Delhi which is responsible for effective implementation of aforementioned provisions of RTE Act, 2009 has miserably failed in performance of its duties, functions and responsibilities.

       

      13.     The petitioner submits that in terms of Clause 7 of said EWS Order of 2011, the Government of NCT of Delhi was obliged to establish a District Admission Monitoring Committee (DAMC) in each district to monitor the entire process of the admission of children in EWS category. However, the said DAMC has not been established till date.

      Clause 7 of the EWS Order of 2011 is reproduced as under:

       

      “7.    District Admission Monitoring Committee: (a) There shall be a District Admission Monitoring Committee (DAMC) in each district and the concerned Dy. Director (Education), Directorate of Education, GNCTD, shall be the Chairperson of the DAMC, concerned Education Officers/Dy. Education Officers of Directorate of Education and concerned Education officer of MCD / NDMC/ Delhi Cantt. Board as the case may be shall be the member of DAMC.

       

      (b)     Any parent, aggrieved by the action of the school may file a complaint in writing to the DAMC, Addressed to the concerned Dy. Director of Education (Chairperson).

       

      (C)     The DAMC shall maintain the Register / database of grievances and will take immediate appropriate action for their redressal. The information shall also be made available on the website of the Directorate of education by DAMC.

       

      (d)     The DAMC shall prepare cluster / Zone-wise vacancy data for free-seats and shall forward the names of children to schools where vacant seats are available, for admission against free-seats, following the principle of neighborhood school.

       

      (e)      The DAMC may call for the details form any school under its jurisdiction for compliance of this order/notification.

       

      (f)      The DAMC shall establish a Help-Desk in the district office to help parents / guardians regarding admissions under free ship quota and other procedures, during office hours manned by two well-conversant officials of the District/Zone. The help desk shall be functional till the admission process is closed.

       

      (g)     The School shall file annual return in the prescribed proforma (Annexure-IV enclosed) to the DAMC of the concerned district regarding details of admissions made within 10 days of the closure of admission.”

       

      14.     The petitioner submits that many schools have not at all given any admission to any child at entry level class under EWS Category in the academic year 2011-12.  As a matter of illustrations, the schools namely, Birla Vidya Niketan, Bal Niketan Public School, K.R Manglam World School, St. Xaviers School, Delhi International Happy School, Gyan Jyoti Vidya Niketan, Deepalaya  Public School, Rajdhani Public School and Orion  Convent School have not admitted even a single child in EWS category in the academic year 2011-12. A true copy of the chart along with supporting documents is enclosed hereto as Annexure B Colly.

       

      15.     The petitioner submits that many unaided private schools have admitted children partially at the entry level class under EWS category. As illustrations, the schools namely, General Raj School, Bhawan Sawan Public School, Cambrige International School, Hamdard Public School, Tinu Public School, Sona Modern Public School, RCCE Public School, Air Force Bal Bharti Public School, Banyan Tree School, Oxford Public School, South Delhi Public School, Frank Angel School, Summer Field School, St. Gorge M School, Sanwal Das M school and DLDAV Shalimar Bagh, Modern Public School and Shalimar Bagh have only partially admitted children in EWS category in the acadmic year 2011-12.  A true copy of the lists of such schools is enclosed hereto as Annexure C.

       

      16.     The petitioner submits that  a very large number of schools have denied admission to very large number of children adopting a device by reducing the number of seats/admissions at entry level class in order to ensure that as less as possible students under EWS category may be taken into the school.  As illustrations, Ryan International, Rohini instead of having 548 admissions at entry point, took admission of 160 students thereby reducing the seats/admissions by 388. Ryan International, Vasant Kunj instead of having 249 seats at the entry level (Nursery) allotted only 167 seats thereby reducing the seats by 82.  Sachdeva Public School, Rohini instead of having 335 seats at entry level (Pre-School), allotted only 40 seats thereby reducing the seats by 295.  DAV Public School, Rohini instead of having 369 seats at entry level (Pre-School) allotted only 131 seats thereby reducing the same by 238.  Modern School, Vasant Kunj instead of having 180 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 113 seats thereby reducing the seats by 67.  Guru Harkishan Public School, Vasant Kunj instead of having 431 seats at antry level (pre-school) allotted only 170 seats thereby reducing the seats by   206 seats.  Delhi Public School, Vasant Kunj instead of having 441 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 170   seats thereby reducing it by 271 seats.  G.D. Goenka, Vasant Kunj instead of having 261 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 114   seats thereby reducing the same by 147 seats.  Heritage, Vasant Kunj instead of having 86 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 64 seats thereby reducing the same by 22 seats.  Crescent, Sarita Vihar instead of having 129 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 20 seats thereby reducing the same by 109 seats.  DL DAV, Pitampura instead of having 682 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 240 seats, thereby reducing it by 442 seats.  Kulachi Hans Raj Model School instead of having 601 seats at entry level (Class-1) allotted only 411 seats, thereby reducing the same by 200 seats.  Presidium Public School, Ashok Vihar instead of having 360 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only   20 seats thereby reducing it by 216 seats. S.D. Public School, Pitampura instead of having 175 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 57 seats thereby reducing the same by 118 seats.  St. Stephen’s School, Pitampura instead of having 316 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only   73 seats thereby reducing the same by 213 seats.  Suraj Bhan DAV, Vasant Vihar instead of having 532 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 200 seats thereby reducing the same by 332 seats.  St. Mark’s Public School, Janakpuri instead of having 255 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 5   seats thereby reducing the same by 250 seats.   MSD Sajeevan, Uttam Nagar instead of having 460 seats at entry level (Class-1) allotted only 43 seats thereby reducing the same by 417 seats.  Mount Abu Public instead of having 115 seats at entry level (KG) allotted only 44   seats thereby reducing the same by 77 seats.  Prabhu Dayal Public School, instead of having 200 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 100 seats thereby reducing the same by 100 seats.  Guru Harkishan Public School, Nanak Piao, instead of having 264 seats at entry level (pre-nursery) allotted only 142   seats thereby reducing the same by122 seats.  Tagore Senior Secondary School, instead of having 262 seats at entry level (pre-school) allotted only 32   seats thereby reducing the same by 230 seats.  New Era Public School, Mayapuri, instead of having 315 seats at entry level (Class-1) allotted only 124  seats thereby reducing the same by 191 seats and Happy Senior School, instead of having 142 seats at entry level (Class-I) allotted only 39   seats thereby reducing the same by 103 seats.   

       

      A true copy of the chart containing names of such schools is enclosed hereto as Annexure-D.

      18.     The petitioner invites attention of this Hon’ble court to

                 Clause 4 (b) of the EWS Order of 2011 which is reproduced

                as under

                 “ 4 (b) Total number of seats at the entry level i.e. nursery

                 or Ist class as the case may be shall not be less than the

                 total   number of seats in any other class of the school”

       

      17.     The petitioner respectfully submits that in term of the above said clause 4(b) of the Delhi School Education( Free seats for Students belonging to Economically weaker section and Disadvantage Group) Order 2011 the schools are obliged to allot seats at entry level not less then the highest number of seats in any other class of the school.

      19.     The petitioner submits that Mr. Khagesh  B. Jha, Advocate associated with the petitioner has made several representations including representations dated 11.09.2011 and 12.09.2011 to the Principal Secretary(Education) and Director of Education respectively highlighting the above facts and demanding action against the erring schools. However, no action has so far been taken by the respondent government.

      True copies of the said representations dated 11.09.2011 and 12.09.2011 are enclosed hereto as Annexures E and F respectively.

               

      18.     The petitioner submits that barring very few schools, others have either not at all implemented the same or have implemented in part and the Govt. of NCT of  Delhi which is responsible for the effective implementation of the provisions of RTE Act, 2009 has remained a mere spectator.

       

      19.     The petitioner submits that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi is the authority under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 which is responsible for implementation of the provisions of the said Act.  In the present case, the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Directorate of Education has utterly failed to ensure that all unaided recognized private schools of Delhi adhere to the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 in relation to admission to children under EWS category and disadvantage category to the extent of 25% at the entry level class.  It is submitted that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi has not taken any action against any of the erring schools.

       

      20.     The petitioner has not filed any similar petition either in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or in any Hon’ble High Courts in India.

       

      21.     The Petitioner submits that it has no other efficacious alternate remedy except to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of   present Public Interest Litigation.

       

      22.     That the annexures annexed to the writ petition are true and correct copy of its originals.

       

      PRAYER

      In the premise aforesaid, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:-

       

      (a)    issue any appropriate writ, order or direction to the  Govt. of NCT of Delhi  to implement the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 in regard to admission and free ship of children belong to weaker sections in unaided recognized private schools of Delhi to the extent of 25% in entry level class;

       

       

      (b)     issue any appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondent  directing the Govt. Of NCT of Delhi for forthwith establish a District Admission Monitoring Committee (D.A.M.C.) in each district in terms of clause 7 of Delhi School Education Act ( Free Seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011.  

      (c)     issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Government of NCT of Delhi to initiate  action against the erring unaided recognized private school which have failed to admit adequate number of children in entry level class.

      (d)    issue any appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Govt. Of NCT of Delhi to ensure that all the unaided recognized private school follws the provision of clause 4(b) of the Delhi School Education ( Free seats for students belonging to Economically Weaker Section and Disadvantage group) Order, 2011 in the academic year 2012-13 and those schools which have allocated less seats in violation of clause 4(b) of Delhi School Education Order 2011 should compensate in class next to the entry level class in the academic year 2012-13. 

      (e)      issue any appropriate pass any such other or further order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may in the facts and circumstances of the present case deem fit and appropriate, in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent; and 

       

      (f )     allow the present PIL with costs.

       

       

       

       

       

      Ashok Agarwal, Khagesh B. Jha

      Advocates for the Petitioner

      483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers,

      Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003

      Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923

       

       

       

       

       

      Place: New Delhi

      Dated: 29/11/2011

       

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.