NO ADMISSION IN GOVT. SCHOOL WITHOUT POLICE VERIFICATION - STUDENT MOVES DELHI HIGH COURT
A shocking incident is highlighted in which 12 year old Master Akshay Kumar seeking admission in class 7 in Government Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar, Delhi in 2012-13 is denied admission on the ground that his parents have failed to get police verification for rent agreement as a proof of residence.
It is submitted that Master Akshay Kumar (D.O.B 10.11.2001) son of Shri Govind Singh and Mrs. Beena Devi resident of A2/09, New Kundli, Delhi – 96 (Mob.-9716580900) has passed class 6 from NC Junior High School (Govt. Recognized), Saraswati Vihar, Khora Colony, Ghaziabad (U.P) in the academic year 2011-12. As the parents were unable to afford school fee anymore, they obtained transfer certificate dated 27.04.2012. As the only option available was to get their son admitted in a Government School, the parents approached Govt. High School, New Kundli for admission but they were told by the school principal that there was no seat vacant.
It is submitted that thereafter, on 03.05.2012, the parents went to another neighbourhood school namely, Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar, Delhi. The Principal of the school asked the parents to produce Ration Card as residence proof. The parents told the principal that they have been living at A2/09, New Kundli – 96 for the last one and a half years as a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 2000/- and they did not have a ration card. However, the admission was not granted and parents were told that unless they could show the proof of residence, the admission could not be granted.
It is submitted that on May 7, 2012, the parents again approached Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar along with the electricity bill in the name of the landlord and ID Card of the land-lord. However, the principal was not convinced and told the parents to bring the rent agreement. The poor parents were forced to part with Rs. 130/- in getting a rent agreement prepared on 11.05.2012. On the same day, they again approached the school and produced a copy of the rent agreement dated 11.5.2012 as a proof of their residence. However, the Principal told them that the rent agreement was not sufficient and they had to produce ration card containing the names of their family members.
It is submitted that thereafter, the parents approached the Education Officer having its office in Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya with a written request that their son Master Akshay Kumar be admitted in Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar in class 7 in the academic year 2012-13. It is interesting to note that the Education Officer made an endorsement on their application to the effect "R/O, Police Verification for Rent Agreement, Sd/- 14.05.2012" and told the parents to first get police verification for rent agreement. The innocent, harassed and hapless parents approached the Police Station, New Ashok Nagar and requested them to verify the rent agreement. The police officials refused to verify the rent agreement saying that they were not obliged to do the same.
Failed to persuade the heartless and adamant Education Officials of Delhi Government, the parents approached Advocate Ashok Agarwal on 18.05.2012 and narrated the entire story of harassment and deprivation of right to education. They have requested Mr. Agarwal to take up their cause for admission of their son Master Akshay Kumar in the Government School.
The above facts reveal that despite Constitutional guarantee through Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India and statutory right through Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the Government Schools are adamant not to grant admission to the students on one pretext or another. Master Akshay's father is a laborer working with an export firm getting around Rs. 5000/- per month as wages. In order to provide opportunity of education to his son in terms of Article 51(A) (k) of the Constitution of India, he did his best but failed. He even could not go for work for at least 5 days and lost a wage of Rs. 800/-.
It is interesting to note that despite clear provisions in the RTE Act, 2009 that admission cannot be denied on any ground to a child below 14 years, Master Akshay Kumar has been denied admission in class 7 on the pretext that his parents were unable to produce police verification for the rent agreement. Such a demand on the part of the Education Officials of the Directorate of Education is not only unwarranted, invalid, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to RTE Act, 2009 but also a typical and mechanical way to deny admission to eligible students in government schools. The case of Akshay Kumar is only a sample. Thousands of other Akshay Kumars are being denied admission in Delhi Government Schools every day on one pretext or the other. If a child is denied admission even in a government school, one can imagine the fate of the Nation. It is no less a National Shame.
Despite a letter to the Delhi Education Minister from Advocate Ashok Agarwal, admission to Akshay Kumar has not been granted till date. Now, Master Akshay Kumar through Advocate Ashok Agarwal has filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court on 01.06.2012 seeking direction against the Govt. of Delhi to grant admission to him in the Govt. School immediately. The case is likely to come up for hearing in the first week of July 2012.
Ashok Agarwal, Advocate
M-9811101923
04.06.2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P.(C) No. _________OF 2012
In the matter of :-
Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
And
In the matter of :-
Impugned illegal and unjustified action of the respondents in denying admission to the petitioner in a respondent no.2-government school or in any other school nearby the petitioner's residence in class-VII, in violation of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, and Articles 14,21,21-A and 38 of the Constitution of India on the ground that his parents have failed to get police verification of rent agreement as proof of residence.
And
In the matter of :-
i. Article 21 and 21-A Constitution of India.
ii. Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and the Rules made there under.
iii. Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Rules made there under.
In the matter of:-
Master Akshay Kumar,
(minor) through his next friend and natural father Sh. Govind Singh
R/o A2/09/New Kundli, Delhi-110096.
------------Petitioner
V/s
1. Government of N.C.T.of Delhi
Through Director of Education,
Old Secretariat Building,
Civil Lines, New Delhi-110054.
2. The Principal
Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, II nd Shift, New Ashok Nagar, Delhi-110096.
-----------Respondents
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 showeath:-
1. That the present writ petition is directed against the impugned action of the respondents in denying admission to the petitioner in Class-VII in the academic year, 2012-13 in the respondent no.2-School or any other school nearby the residence of the petitioner in violation of the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the rule made there under and the Article 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India on untenable ground that his parents have failed to get police verification of rent agreement as proof of residence.
2. That the brief facts of the case are submitted in brief as under:-
3. That Master Akshay Kumar (D.O.B 10.11.2001) is son of Shri Govind Singh and Mrs. Beena Devi resident of A2/09, New Kundli, Delhi – 96. The petitioner is a minor being 12 years old and as such has approached this Hon'ble court through his next friend and natural father Sh. Govind Singh.
4. That the petitioner has passed class 6 from NC Junior High School (Govt. Recognized), Saraswati Vihar, Khora Colony, Ghaziabad (U.P) in the academic year 2011-12.
5. That as the parents of the petitioners were unable to afford school fee anymore, they obtained transfer certificate dated 27.04.2012. As the only option available was to get their son admitted in a Government School, the parents approached Govt. High School, New Kundli for admission but they were told by the school principal that there was no seat vacant.
A true copy of the transfer certificate is enclosed herewith as Annexure-P1.
6. That thereafter, on 03.05.2012, the parents of the petitioner went to another neighborhood school namely, Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar, Delhi, respondent no.2 herein. The Principal of the school asked the parents to produce Ration Card as residence proof. The parents told the principal that they have been living at A2/09, New Kundli – 96 for the last one and a half years as a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 2000/- and they did not have a ration card. However, the admission was not granted and parents were told that unless they could show the proof of residence, the admission could not be granted.
7. That on May 7, 2012, the parents again approached Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar, hereinafter referred to as the respondent no.2, along with the electricity bill in the name of the landlord and ID Card of the land-lord. However, the principal was not convinced and told the parents to bring the rent agreement. The poor parents were forced to part with Rs. 130/- in getting a rent agreement prepared on 11.05.2012. On the same day, they again approached the school and produced a copy of the rent agreement dated 11.5.2012 as a proof of their residence. However, the Principal told them that the rent agreement was not sufficient and they had to produce ration card containing the names of their family members.
A true copy of the Rent Agreement and Identity card of the landlord are enclosed herewith as Annexures Annxure-P-2 and P-3 respectively.
8. That thereafter, the parents approached the Education Officer having its office in Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya with a written request dated 14/05/2012 that their son Master Akshay Kumar be admitted in Govt. Sarvodya Bal Vidyalaya, New Ashok Nagar, respondent no.2 herein, in class 7 in the academic year 2012-13. It is interesting to note that the Education Officer made an endorsement on their application to the effect "R/O, Police Verification for Rent Agreement, Sd/- 14.05.2012" and told the parents to first get police verification for rent agreement.
A true copy of the request dated 14.05.2012 is enclosed hereto as Annexure-P4.
9. That the innocent, harassed and hapless parents immediately approached the Police Station, New Ashok Nagar and requested them to verify the rent agreement. The police officials refused to verify the rent agreement saying that they were not obliged to do the same.
10. That having failed to persuade the heartless and adamant Education Officials of Delhi Government, the parents approached the social jurist, a civil right group, on 18.05.2012 and narrated the entire story of harassment and deprivation of right to education. The parents of the petitioner have requested the said group to take up their cause for admission of their son Master Akshay Kumar in class VII in any Government School nearby their residence.
A true copy of the letter dated 18/05/2012 is enclosed hereto as Annexure-P5.
11. That the Social Jurist sent a letter dated 21/05/2012 to the Sh. Arvinder Singh Lovely, Delhi Education Minister, narrating the entire facts of the case and requesting for taking urgent action in the matter ensuring admission of the petitioner in the respondent no.2, school in the academic year, 2012-13. However no response has been received till date.A copy of the said letter was also sent to the respondent no.2 school.
A copy of the said letter dated 21/05/2012 is annexed herewith as A Annexure-P6.
12. That the above facts reveal that despite constitutional guarantee through Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India and statutory right through Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the Government Schools are adamant not to grant admission to the students on one pretext or another.
13. That Master Akshay's father is a laborer working with an export firm getting around Rs. 5000/- per month as wages. In order to provide opportunity of education to his son in terms of Article 51(A) (k) of the Constitution of India, he did his best but failed. He even could not go for work for at least 5 days and lost a wage of Rs. 800/-.
14. That despite clear provisions in the RTE Act, 2009 that admission cannot be denied on any ground to a child below 14 years, Master Akshay Kumar has been denied admission in class 7 on the pretext that his parents were unable to produce police verification for the rent agreement. Such a demand on the part of the Education Officials of the Directorate of Education is not only unwarranted, invalid, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to RTE Act, 2009 but also a typical and mechanical way to deny admission to eligible students in government schools. The case of Akshay Kumar is only a sample. Thousands of other Akshay Kumars are being denied admission in Delhi Government Schools every day on one pretext or another. If a child is denied admission even in a government school, one can imagine the fate of the Nation. It is no less a National Shame.
15. The petitioner therefore challenged the impugned action of the respondents on the following grounds amongst others:-
Grounds
A. Because the impugned action of the respondents in denying admission to the petitioner in class-VII of the respondent no.2 school is illegal, unjustified,arbitrary,discriminatory,unconstitutional and in violation of the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
B. Because the Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India provides a constitutional guarantee and Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, provides statutory right that every child below the age of 14 years shall not be denied admission in school but despite that the Government Schools are adamant not to grant admission to the students like the petitioner on one pretext or another.
C. Because the provisions of the RTE Act, 2009 clearly provides that admission cannot be denied to child below 14 years on any ground.
D. Because the petitioner has been illegally denied admission in class 7 on the pretext that his parents were unable to produce police verification for the rent agreement. Such a demand on the part of the Education Officials of the Directorate of Education is not only unwarranted, invalid, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to RTE Act, 2009 but also a typical and mechanical way to deny admission to eligible students in government schools. If a child is denied admission even in a government school, one can imagine the fate of the Nation. It is no less a National Shame.
E. Because it is the Constitutional and statutory duty on the apart of the respondent no.1 to provide education to the children below 14 ears of age through its schools.
F. Because the impugned action of the respondents is also other bad in law.
16. That the petitioner submits that he has no efficacious alternative remedy except to approach this Hon'ble court by way of the present writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India.
17. That the petitioners have not filed any similar petition either in the Hon'ble Suprem court or before nay Hon'ble High court in India.
18. That the annexures as annexed hereto are true and correct copies of their respective originals.
Prayer:-
In the premises aforesaid, the petitioner most respectfully pray that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to:-
a. issue any appropriate writ, order or directions directing the respondent no.1 to forthwith grant admission to the petitioner in the class-VII in the academic year 2012-13 in the respondent no.2 school or in any other Government School nearby the residence of the petitioner.
b. Issue any appropriate writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court my deem fit, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, in favour of the petitioner.
c. Allow the present writ petition with costs in favour of the petitioner.
Ashok Aggarwal, M.N.Singh and Kusum Sharma
Advocates for the Petitioner,
483, Block-II, Lawyers Chamebr,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi-110002.
Delhi
Date: 01.06.2012
You are receiving this message because you are a member of the community Dalits Media Watch.
A reply to this message will be sent to all members of Dalits Media Watch.
No comments:
Post a Comment