SCHOOL ASK TO IMPLEMENT VTH PAY PANEL RECOMMENDATION

April 26, 2010 – Upholding the 11^th January 2010 ruling of a Single Judge (Justice Kailash Gambhir), a Division Bench of Delhi High Court headed by the Acting Chief Justice Madan B. Lokur today asked Rukmini Devi Jaipuria School to implement the Recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission and pay its teachers accordingly.

Justice Kailash Gambhir had asked the school to pay all arrears w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to a group of teachers who had approached the High Court after the school denied them the benefits of Vth Pay Commission.

The case was filed by four teachers of the school through Advocate Ashok Agarwal, contending that they were also entitled to revision of pay scale equivalent to the teachers employed in schools run by Delhi Government.

Appearing for the teachers, Advocate Ashok Agarwal argued before the Division Bench that Section 10 of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 mandates that the employees of all the Unaided Private Recognized Schools are entitled to benefit of pay and allowances etc. equivalent to what is paid to their counterparts working in schools run by Government and these unaided schools are obliged to comply the law.

When Senior Advocate N K Kaul, appearing for the school, brought to the notice of the Court that the Directorate of Education has failed to implement the recommendations of Vth Pay Commission uniformly w.e.f. 1.1.1996 in all the unaided private recognized Schools, the Court issued limited notice to the Directorate of Education to explain as to why the Government has not been implementing the Vth Pay Commission recommendations uniformly in all the unaided recognized Schools.

Mr. Kaul pointed out that there were 28 Zones in Delhi with 1211 schools and the school had sought information under RTI Act, 2005 and the same with respect to only 6 zones was supplied which shows that out of 105 schools in the 6 zones, 35 schools implemented the Vth Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1996, 03 schools implemented the same w.e.f. 01.04.1997 and as many as 67 schools have implemented the same post 01.04.1997.

Ashok Agarwal, Advocate

M-09811101923

26.04.2010

List of some of the unaided recognized private schools which failed to implement Vth pay commission recommendations w.e.f. 01.01.1996

S.No.	Name of School	Date of implementation of Vth Pay Commission
1	RDJ Public School	01.04.1997
2	Joseph & Marry public School	01.04.1997
3	Mamta Bhawan Public School	01.12.1997
4	Mount Oliver Sr. Sec. School	01.01.1998
5	Ravindra Memorial Public School	01.01.1998
6	Apex Public School	01.01.1998
7	Oscar Public School	01.04.1998
8	Virmani Public School	01.04.1999
9	Nalanda Modern Public School	01.01.2000
10	Dharam Dutt Tyagi Public School	01.06.2003
11	Jainmati Jain Public School, P. Dhiraj	01.03.1998
12	Nav Bharti S. S. School, Shakti Nagar	01.06.1998
13	Arya Vidya Mandir, Pratap Nagar	01.07.1998
14	Mamava Bhardwaj Public School	01.12.1997
15	Nalanda Modern Public School	2000
16	Ocean Public School	01.04.1998
17	Mount Olivat Sr. Sec. School	01.01.1998
18	Dharam Dut Tyagi Public School	01.06.2003
19	Rukmini Devi Jaipuria Public School	01.04.1997
20	Joseph and Nancy Public School	01.04.1997
21	Ramdan Memorial Public School	01.01.1998
22	Virmani Public School	01.01.1999
23	Apex Public School	01.01.1998
24	Jainmati Jain Public School, Pahari Dhiraj	01.03.1998
25	Nav Bharti SSS, Shri Ngr. Colony	01.06.1998
26	Arya Vidya Mandir, Partap Nagar	01.07.1998
27	St. Parmanand Public School	01.01.1997
28	Mata Ram Rakhi Sanatan Dharma Saraswati Bal Mandir	01.01.1998
29	Mount Abu Public School	01.04.1998
30	Darshan Academy	01.03.2001
31	St. Parmanand Public School	01.04.1997
32	Goodley Public School	01.09.2009
33	Mata Ramrakhi Sanatan Dharam Saraswati Bal Mandir	01.01.1998
34	Mount Abu Public School	01.04.1998
35	DPP School, B-4, S.J. Enclave	15.12.1997
36	Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak, Shastri Sadan, Sector-3, R.K. Puram	01.07.1997
37	Mount Carmel School, A-21, Anand Niketan	April 1997
38	Hill Grow Public School, S.J. Enclave	01.07.1997
39	Ramjas School, Sector-IV, R. K. Puram	01.12.1997
40	Green Field School, S.J. Enclave, A-2 Block	01.10.1997
41	Central Academy, Sector 13, R.K.Puram	30.09.1997
42	Sanjay Bal Vidyalaya, Sector-VII, R.K. Puram	01.12.1997
43	Springdales Public School, Dhaula Kuan	09.12.1997
44	Hope Hall Foundation Public School, Sector VII, R K Puram	01.12.1997
45	Rattan Chand Arya Public School, Y-Block, Sarojini Nagar	01.04.1998
46	DPS Sector 12, R K Puram	31.01.1988
47	Vidya Niketan Public School, Moti Bagh	01.06.1998
48	St. Mary School, S.J. Enclave	01.04.1998
49	Sadhnu Vasvani Int. School for Girls	28.02.1998
50	St. Paul School, C-III, S.J. Enclave	01.01.2004
51	Rattan Chand Arya Public School, Y-Block, Sarojini Nagar	01.04.1998
52	DPP School, B-4, S.J. Enclave	December 1997
53	Lal Bahadur Shastri Smarak, Shastri Sadan, Sector-III, R.K. Puram	01.07.1997
54	DPS Sector 12, R.K. Puram	31.01.1998
55	Mount Carmel School, A-21, Anand Niketan, N.D.	April 1997
56	Vidya Niketan Public School, Nanakpura, Moti Bagh.	June 1998
57	Hill Grow Public School, S.J. Enclave	01.07.1997
58	Ramjas School, Sector-IV, R K Puram	01.121997
59	St. Mary’s School, S.J. Enclave	01.04.1998
60	Sadhu Vaswani International School for Girls	28.02.1998
61	Greenfield School, S.J. Enclave, A-2 Block	01.10.1997
62	St. Paul’s School C-III, S.J. Enclave	01.01.2004
63	Central Academy SSS Sec. XIII R.K.P.	30.09.1997
64	Sanjay Bal Vidyalaya Sec. VII R.K.P.	01.12.1997
65	Springdales Public School Dhaula Kuan	09.12.1997
66	Hope Hall Foundation Public School Sec. VII, R K Puram	01.12.1997
67	Convent of St. Marks School, Mahaveer Enclave, Bengali Colony	26.10.1996
68	Delhi Public School, Sector -3, Dwarks	01.08.1997
69	Jindal Public School, Dwarka	01.11.1997
70	Laxman Convent School, Rajnagar, Palam	01.11.1997
71	New Delhi Convent School, Rajnagar, Palam	01.11.1997
72	Rita Public School, West Sagar	01.11.1997
73	Shiv vani Sr. Sec. School, Palam, Dabri Road	01.02.1998
74	Delhi Jain Public School, Palam	01.09.1998
75	Jinwani Bharti Public School, Dwarka	01.09.1998
76	Sulabh Public School, Palam Dabri Road	01.12.1998
77	Deep Parmarth model School, Mehrauli Road, Palam	01.03.1999
78	Karandeep Public School, Bijwasan	01.04.1999
79	Nehru Academy Vashishth Park	01.11.1999
80	Modern Convent School, Dwarka	01.04.2001
81	Venkateshwar International School, Dwarka	01.04.2001
82	Saraswati Model School, Sector 10, Dwarka	01.08.2001
83	Universal Public School, Mahavir Enclave, N. Delhi	01.04.2002
84	Modern Public School, Palam	01.04.2004
85	Vishwabharti Public School, Dwarka	01.04.2004
86	MBH International Public School, Sector-6, Dwarka	01.07.2004
87	Indraprasth International Public School, Sector-10, Dwarka	01.03.2005
88	Mount Carmel Public School, Sector 22, Dwarka	01.03.2005
89	Ram Chandra S.D. Public School, Palam	01.03.2005
90	Besva International School, Dwarka	01.09.2005
91	SAM International School, Dwarka	01.06.2006
92	Queen Mary Public School, Dwarka	01.03.2007
93	J M International School, Sector 6, Dwarka	01.04.2007
94	Paramount Public School, Sector 23, Dwarka	01.04.2007
95	Triveni Bal Upwan, Madanpuri, N. Delhi	01.09.2008
96	Basava International School, Site-1, Sector 23, Dwarka, N.D.	01.09.2005
97	Convent of St. Mark’s School, H-2/147, Mahavir Enclave, Bengali Colony, New Delhi.	26.10.1996
98	Deep Parmarth Model School, Puran Nagar, Mehrauli Road, Palam Village, N.D.	01.03.1999
99	Delhi Jain Public School, 12 Railway Road, Palam, N.D.	01.09.1998
100	Delhi Public School, Sec-3, Dwarka, N.D.	01.08.1997
101	Inderparstha International School, Sec. 10, Dwarka, N.D.	01.03.2005
102	J.M. International School, Sec. 6, Dwarka, N.D.	01.04.2007
103	Jindal Public School, Dwarka, Palam Road, N.D.	01.11.1997
104	Jinvani Bharti Public School, Sec. 4 Phase-I, Dwarka, N.D.	01.09.1998
105	Karan Deep public School, Vill Bharthal, P. O. Bijwasan, N.D.	01.04.1999
106	Laxman Convent School, G-2 Raj Nagar II, Palam, N.D.	01.11.1997
107	MDH International School, Plot No.3, Pocket-2, Sec.-6, Dwarka, N.D.	01.07.2004
108	Model Public School, WZ 603-B, VPO Palam, N.D.	01.04.2004
109	Modern Convent School, Sec. 4, Dwarka, N.D	01.04.2004
110	Mount Carmel School, Sec. 22, Dwarka, N.D.	01.04.2001
111	Nehru Academy, Rz- 55/56, Vashisth Park, N.D.	01.03.2005
112	New Delhi Convent School, RZH-121, Raj Nagar II, Palam, N.D.	01.11.1999
113	Paramount Public School, Sec.23, Dwarka, N.D.	01.04.2002
114	Ram Chander S.D. Public School, Sadh Nagar Part-I, Palam, N.D.	01.03.2005
115	Queen’s Valley Public School, Sec. 8, Dwarka, N.D.	01.03.2007
116	Reeta Public School, RZT/14, Dyal Park, W.Sagarpur, N.D.	01.11.1997
117	SAM International School, Sec.12, Phase-I, Dwarka, N.D.	01.04.2006
118	Saraswati Model School Sec. 10, Phase-I, Dwarka, N.D.	01.08.2001
119	Shiv Vani Sr. Sec. School, Mahavir Enclave, Palam Dabri Road, N.D.	01.02.1998
120	Sulabh Public School, RZ 83, Sulabh Bhawan, Palam, Dabri Road, N.D.	01.12.1998
121	Triveni Bal Upvan, Rz-89, Gali NO. 11, Madanpuri, N.D.	01.09.2008
122	Universal Public School, G-109, Mahavir Enclave, N.D.	01.04.2002
123	Vandana International School, Sec. 10, Dwarka, N.D.	01.01.2006
124	Venketeshwar International School, Sec.10, Dwarka, N.D.	01.04.2001
125	Vishwa Bharti Public School, Sec. 6, Dwarka, N.D.	01.04.2001
126	Pooma Projna Pub School, D-3, V. Kunj	01.04.1998
127	SKR Public School, Boriawala, Inderpuri	01.04.1998
128	Mosonic Public School, Sector-B	01.05.2000
129	Kathuria Public School, V. Kunj	01.11.1997
130	Vasant Valley Sector C, V. Kunj	31.03.1998
131	Heritage School, V. Kunj	01.10.1999
132	Sumermal Jain public School, Janakpuri	01.12.1997
133	Blooming Birds Public School, Moti Nagar	01.08.2005
134	S. D. Public School, Kirti Nagar	01.04.1999
135	Daya Nad Model School, West Patel Nagar	01.01.1998
136	Shaheed B.S. Mem. Sr. Sec. School, Mansarovar Garden	01.07.2000
137	Sunhill Public School, Ranjeet Nagar	01.12.1999

12 years old girls want to study – MCD School says no

SOCIAL JURIST

A Civil Rights Group

To,

29.04.2010

1. Hon’ble Smt. Sheila Dikshit,

Chief Minister of Delhi,

Delhi Secretariat, I.P.Estate,

New Delhi-110002

2. The Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation of Delhi,

Town Hall, Chandni Chowk,

Delhi-110006

Sub: - 12 years old girls want to study – MCD School says no

Madam/Sir,

We have the honour to bring to your kind notice that MCD Primary School, Subhash Park, Delhi, has denied admission to two 12 years’ old out of school girls on the alleged ground of over-age.

Kumari Huma and Kumari Faria (M-9311206549), r/o Gali No. 1, I-7, Janta Mazdoor Colony, Zafrabad, Delhi, have approached the MCD Primary School, Subhash Park, Delhi on 22.04.2010 for admission in age of appropriate class but the school denied them admission saying that the school have no arrangement for their studies as they had never studied before.

On the request of these girls, one of the teachers of the school talked to me on telephone saying that it was not possible to admit these older girls who have never studied earlier. I told the teacher about the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act, 2009) in terms of which the school was obliged to admit these girls in the class appropriate to their age. However, the teacher did not agree to admit these girls in school.

These girls have now given to me their complaints dated 24.04.2010 stating that they have never gone to school earlier but now they want to study but the school has refused to grant them admission. They have been advised to first go to Aaganwari to study. They have also stated that the teacher after talking to me on telephone told these girls that Ashok Agarwal is crazy as he sends older children to school for admission.

It is submitted that despite express provisions in the RTE Act, 2009 to grant admission to the children in the age group six to fourteen in the age appropriate class, the schools are shamelessly denying admissions to the children of this age group. Moreover, they don’t hesitate to make any type of comments. I can only say that it is a reflection of their attitude towards the education of the children of the masses. There is an urgent need to change such attitude if the government is really serious to make RTE Act, 2009 a success.

It is, therefore, requested that you may kindly look into this matter seriously and address the problem highlighted herein.

With regards,

Ashok Agarwal, Advocate

Advisor, Social Jurist

M-9811101923

Mockery of RTE Act, 2009 - Government Schools deny admission to girl students in Class VI‏

SOCIAL JURIST

To,
08.04.2010

The Hon’ble Education Minister,
Government of NCT of Delhi
Delhi Secretariat, I.P.Estate,
New Delhi-110002

Sub: Mockery of RTE Act, 2009 - Government Schools deny admission to girl students in Class VI

Sir,
We have the honour to bring to your kind notice the plight of two girl students, who have though passed class V from a MCD Primary School in the academic year 2009-2010, have been denied admission by two Government schools of the area in Class VI in the academic year 2010-2011 making mockery of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The girls and their poor parents (daily rated labourers) have been running from one school to another for the past seven days for securing admission in any of the two government schools. But neither of the schools has come forward to grant admission to these hapless girl students. The students and the parents have given us their grievances in writing in this regard (copies are enclosed).

Kumari Preeti d/o Shri Ruddal (M-9582558670) r/o A-17, Kausal Puri, Azadpur Delhi-110009 and Kumari Pinki d/o Shri Kailash Chand (M-9540181843) r/o N-21 A/84, Moujiwala Bagh, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi have passed class V from MCD Primary School, Lal Bagh New I, Delhi-33 in the academic year 2009-2010. The said MCD School issued them the Transfer Certificates on 29.03.2010 and told them to go to Government Girls Secondary School, Azadpur Village, Delhi-110033 which was a link school. These students approached the Principal of the Government Girls Secondary School, Azadpur Village, Delhi-110033 on 01.04.2010 for admission in Class VI. However, the principal of the said school told the students that they could not be granted admission in this school and they were advised to go to Government Girls Secondary School, Azadpur Colony, Delhi for admission. These students, thereafter, approached the Govt Girls Secondary School, Azadpur Colony, Delhi for admission on 01.04.2010. However, this school also denied admission saying that they did not have their names in school’s computer. The other interesting reason advanced by the school for denying admission was that this school did not cater the students residing in Lal Bagh area. It is submitted that since then, these unfortunate students and their hapless parents have been running between these schools like a shuttle cock for admission in class VI. Failing in their efforts to persuade the heartless, irresponsible and insensitive principals of these schools, they have approached me on 07.04.2010 with the written complaints.

Section 3 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 is reproduced as under:-

“3. Right of child to free and compulsory education – (1) Every child of the age of six to fourteen years shall have a right to free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood school till completion of elementary education.

(2) For the purpose of sub-section (1), no child shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing the elementary education.”

The present incident exposes all tall claims of the Government of Delhi that they are concerned about the education of the students and particularly of the girl students. Despite so much propaganda about the right of the children to education as provided by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (came into effect from 01.04.2010), the authorities as usual have been unconcerned towards the rights of the children. It is brutal and no less a mockery of fundamental right to education as guaranteed to every child of the country by the Constitution of India. It is submitted that the principals of these schools are unmindful of the fact that by their conduct they have violated the most precious human and fundamental right to education of these students.

It is, therefore, requested that immediate action may kindly be taken in this matter ensuring admission to both these student in Class VI in any one of the aforementioned schools. It is also requested that action may be taken against the erring official responsible for the violation of the fundamental right to education of these students. It is needless to say that for the violation of the fundamental right to education as guaranteed under Article 21 (right to life with dignity) and Article 21-A (right to quality elementary education), these students are also entitled to claim suitable amount of compensation from the Government of Delhi.


With regards,



Ashok Agarwal, Advocate
Advisor Social Jurist
M-9811101923

A SCHOOL CAN NOT FIX UPPER AGE FOR ADMISSION

Article 21-A of the Constitution of India mandates State to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act, 2009) enacted pursuant to Article 21-A of the Constitution provides that every child of the age of six to fourteen years shall have a right to free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood school till completing the elementary education. If a school is allowed to fix an upper limit for admission of a child in a class at elementary education level, the very object and purpose of both constitutional and statutory right of a child to receive elementary education would be completely defeated.

A Kendriya Vidyalaya (KVS) at Rangpuri, New Delhi has denied admission to Master Aman Kumar Choudhary in Class I on the ground that Aman was seven years one month and two days old as on 31 March 2010 and therefore, overage by one month and two days. The decision is based on the KVS admission policy according to which a minimum and maximum age of a child for admission to class I must be 5 years and 7 years respectively as on 31st March of the year in which admission is sought. Like Master Aman, there must be hundreds of other children also who would have been denied admission to Class I by the KVS schools all over the country on the similar ground. It is unfortunate that the State funded school has deprived children of their right to receive education as guaranteed to them under the Constitution and that too on a flimsy ground.

One can understand the minimum entry age for a child to a formal school system but it is beyond imagination that maximum age limits can be prescribed for the same. The Delhi School Education Act, 1973 prescribes minimum age of admission in Class I as 5 years as on 31st day of March of the year in which admission is being sought but does not prescribe the maximum age limit. The Explanation to Clause 21 of the Recognized Schools (Admission Procedure for Pre-Primary Class) Order, 2007 which are framed under the provisions of Delhi School Education Act, 1973 clearly provides that for the purposes of this clause, the ages stipulated for entry into standard one, pre-primary class and pre-school class are the minimum ages and there is no bar to children older than the ages specified in this clause being given admission to these classes. These provisions of law make it very clear that there is no maximum age limit prescribed in law for admission in class I.

That even RTE Act, 2009 does not prescribe the maximum age for admission in class I. It is submitted that a child in terms of Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India has a fundamental right to receive education in the school and he can not be deprived of the same except according to the procedure established by law. It is submitted that a child in the age group six to fourteen years has a fundamental right to education and if he is deprived of the said right merely on the ground of over-age by 2 months 1 day, the said action on the part of the school would be arbitrary, irrational and discriminatory and would not stand the test of Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India. It is also submitted that the minimum age of entry in a formal school system may have some relevance keeping in view the interest of the child but the maximum age for receiving school education must have no relevance or nexus with the object underlying therein. Therefore, it is submitted that the KVS schools are not justified in denying admission to the children on the alleged ground of over-age.

There is another aspect of the matter also. The KVS school being a school under specified category of school under RTE Act, 2009, had some specific criteria which was met by Master Aman. It is submitted that after the coming into effect of the RTE Act, 2009 how can the KVS school say that the child is too old for class one? Those days are over. Now a child admitted over six, but below fourteen years has a right to education in the school in an age appropriate class. The KVS school’s action in denying admission to Master Aman on the ground of overage also tantamount to “screening procedure” which is not only prohibited by Section 13 of the RTE Act, 2009 but also makes it punishable at law.

The KVS policy of admission is irritation, illegal, irrelevant arbitrary, discriminatory, illogical, unreasonable, unfair, anti-child, hit by articles 14 (right to equality), 21 (right to life with dignity), 21-A (right to good quality elementary education) and 38 (right to social justice) of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, Delhi School Education Act, 1993, Recognized Schools (Admission Procedure for Pre-Primary Class) Order, 2007 and UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). A school can not legally fix upper age limit for admission of a child in a class at elementary education level and therefore, the Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan and all other schools having similar admission policies now need to reframe their admission policies.


(written by Shri Ashok Agarwal, Advocate, M-09811101923, contact at Email: ashokagarwal1952@hotmail.com 17.04.2010)

Air Force Sr. Sec.School violates RTE Act, 2009 by subjecting students to screening procedure for admission to class VI

SOCIAL JURIST

A Civil Rights Group

Dated: 07.04.2010

To,

The Director of Education

Govt. of NCT of Delhi,

Old Secretariat Building

Civil Line, Delhi-110054

Sub Dear Sir,

We have the honor to bring to your kind notice a case of violation of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 where a child was subjected to a test and later was not given admission in Air Force Senior Secondary School, OWC, Race Course Road, Delhi- 110003

It is submitted that Sh. Manveer Bhati R/o F-1947, Neta Ji Nagar, New Delhi wanted to get his son Jeetu Bhati admitted in Class VI to the said school and bought the admission form. The school charged Rs. 30/- for the said form. We understand that the said school being a Govt. aided school and is not entitled to charge money for admission form.

It is submitted that on 03.04.2010 the admission test was held and on 07.04.2010 the said school displayed the list of students selected for admission in which the name of Jeetu Bhati was missing. On being asked the reason for the same, the school authorities said that the reason for not selecting students cannot be made public. It is submitted that the said list of students contained the names of only 21 students even though many seats still remain vacant. It is submitted that in one class there is a vacancy of 40 seats and thus the school should be compelled to fill up the seats.

The above mentioned case raises a number of points in which the school is violative of the provisions of the Right to Free and Compulsory Education, 2009.

It is submitted that the above reproduced procedure for admission through admission test with regard to admission of students in classes VI by Air Force Senior Secondary School is prohibited by Section.13 of The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act, 2009). It is further submitted that under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (2) of Section.13 of the RTE Act, 2009 such screening procedure is an offence punishable with fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees for the first contravention and fifty thousand rupees for each subsequent contravention.

Your kind attention is invited to the abovementioned provisions of Section.13 of the RTE Act, 2009 which are reproduced as under:

“Section 13 (1) No school or person shall, while admitting a child, collect any capitation fee and subject the child or his or her parents or guardian to any screening procedure.

(2) Any school or person, if in contravention of the provision of sub-section (1),-

(a) receives capitation fee, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to ten times the capitation fee charged;

(b) subjects a child to screening procedure, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees for the first contravention and fifty thousand rupees for each subsequent contraventions.”

Your kind attention is also invited to Section 2(o) of the RTE Act, 2009 which is reproduced as under:

Section 2(o) “screening procedure” means the method of selection for admission of a child, in preference over another, other than a random method;

From the reading of the aforementioned provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, it is abundantly clear that no school can subject a student to any screening procedure (which includes admission test) for his/her admission from class I to VIII.

It is further submitted that the school has been charging Rs. 30/- per admission form from thousands of applicants. According to the provisions of the Government Order dated 15.12.1998 and also 11.02.2009, such fee cannot exceed Rs. 25/-. A copy of one such Receipt of Rs. 30/- is being attached with this letter.

It is requested that action be taken against Air Force Senior Secondary School for conducting admission test (screening procedure) for admission of students to class VI. It is further requested that strict action must be taken against the said school for charging more than the prescribed amount for Admission Form. It is submitted that by doing the same the school is not only violating the provisions of the Government Order but also engaging in commercial activities.

It is also requested that the said school be directed to give admission to Jeetu Bhati S/o Manvir Bhati in the said school in class Vi in the academic year 2010-2011.

With regards,

Ashok Agarwal, Advocate

Advisor, Social Jurist

M- 9811101923

POINTS-BASED NURSERY ADMISSION CRITERIA HIT BY RTE ACT, 2009

POINTS BASED NURSERY ADMISSION CRITERIA VIOLATES THE MANDATE OF THE RIGHT OF CHILDREN TO FREE AND COMPULSORY EDUCATION ACT, 2009 – DELHI GOVT MUST RE-LOOK SUCH CRITERIA

Nursery admissions in unaided recognized private schools in Delhi for the academic session 2010-2011 are practically over before the coming into force of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act, 2009) from 01.04.2010. These admissions were regulated by a Delhi Government’s Order namely, “the Recognized Schools (Admission Procedure for Pre-primary Class) Order, 2007” (In short, Nursery Admissions Order, 2007) having been issued under the provisions of Delhi Schools Education Act, 1973 after the intervention of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in a public interest litigation filed by the aggrieved parents challenging the then prevailing nursery admission criteria which included test and interview not only of the 3+ or 4+ years child but also of his/her parents. After coming into force the RTE Act, 2009, the points based nursery admission criteria has come in clear conflict with the provisions of the RTE Act, 2009 and therefore, the Government of Delhi needs to re-frame the same so to bring it in conformity with the provisions of RTE Act, 2009.

The Clause 14 of the Nursery Admissions Order, 2009 is reproduced below:-

“14. The school shall develop and adopt criteria for admission which shall be clear, well defined, equitable, non-discriminatory and unambiguous. The school shall adopt those parameters which are in the best interests of children and are in line with its own philosophy, and these shall include the following:-

(i) Neighbourhood.---- It is in the interest of children that they are provided admission in a school nearest to their residence. The schools shall, therefore, give preference to children living in nearby areas. If the school is satisfied that a good and safe transport is available for a child, then, it may consider giving admission to such a child even if he/she lives at a place quite far off from the school. This is also important as distribution of schools is not uniform in the city.
(ii) Background of the child. – Children from all social and economic backgrounds shall be equally considered for admission. The school shall make a conscious effort to admit children with special needs or from vulnerable backgrounds.
(iii) Sibling – Generally, parent(s) or guardian(s) prefer that their children study in the same school. Therefore, the school may give preference to a child of such parents or guardians.
(iv) Single Parent i.e.divorced/widow/widower/unmarried.-- The school may give preference to admit child of such single parent.
(v) Management Quota.—School may have a management quota which shall not exceed twenty per cent of the total seats available for admission in the class.
(vi) Minority – All minority schools can keep the minority status of the child seeking admission as a criterion.
Schools can also fix additional parameters but are required to stipulate a point system for each criteria/parameter.”

The relevant provisions of Section 2 (o) and Section 13 of the RTE Act, 2009 are reproduced below:-
“Section 2(o) “screening procedure” means the method of selection for admission of a child, in preference over another, other than a random method;

Section 13 (1) No school or person shall, while admitting a child, collect any capitation fee and subject the child or his or her parents or guardian to any screening procedure.
(2) Any school or person, if in contravention of the provision of sub-section (1),-
(a) receives capitation fee, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to ten times the capitation fee charged;
(b) subjects a child to screening procedure, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees for the first contravention and fifty thousand rupees for each subsequent contraventions.”

It is true that the RTE Act, 2009 is primarily for the children in the age group six to fourteen years. However, by implications it also applies to admission of a child in the pre-primary classes (where ever the same exists as a part of an elementary school). It is submitted that Section 13 read with Section 2 (o) of RTE Act, 2009 applies to every school whether aided or unaided or government run or of specified category. It is also submitted that the RTE Act, 2009 being a Central law would prevail over the State laws.

It is submitted that the above ‘points-based procedure’ for admission of students in nursery classes in unaided private schools as contemplated in Clause 14 of the Recognized Schools (Admission Procedure for Pre-primary Class) Order, 2007 tantamount to “screening procedure” and is, therefore, prohibited by Section 13 of The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. It is further submitted that under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (2) of Section 13 of the RTE Act, 2009 such screening procedure is an offence punishable with fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees for the first contravention and fifty thousand rupees for each subsequent contravention. It is submitted that the Government is certainly entitled to mandate the unaided schools to give preference to the children living within a radius of 5 kilometers of the school. In nutshell, the criteria based on the neighborhood and the draw of lot would be the only valid criteria which shall stand the test of constitutional philosophy of right to equality (Art. 14), right to life with dignity (Art. 21), right to quality elementary education (Art. 21-A) and right to social justice (Art. 38) and also of RTE Act, 2009.

(written by Advocate Ashok Agarwal, contact at ashokagarwal1952@hotmail.com M-09811101923 dated 04.04.2010)

SCREENIG PROCEDURE FOR CLASS VI ADMISSION - DELHI GOVT VIOLATES RTE ACT, 2009

SOCIAL JURIST

Dated: 02.04.2010

To,

1. Hon’ble Mrs. Sheila Dikshit,
Chief Minister of Delhi,
Secretariat, I. P. Estate,
New Delhi-110002

2. The Director of Education
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Old Secretariat Building
Civil Lines, Delhi-110054

Sub:

Delhi Government violates RTE Act, 2009 by subjecting children to screening procedure for admission to Class VI in Rajkiya Pratibha Vikas Vidyalayas in the academic year 2010-2011


Dear Madam/Sir,

We have the honor to invite your kind attention to the admission notice issued by the Directorate of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi that appeared in all the leading newspapers dated 28.03.2010 and is also available at DOE website http://edudel.nic.in/new_circulars/rpvv_form_dt_29032010.html regarding admission of students to class VI in all Rajkiya Pratibha Vikas Vidyalayas run by DOE. The said admission notice invites students for admission in class VI in these schools through ENTRANCE TEST which will consist of objective type questions to test numerical ability, mental ability, general knowledge and language comprehension and the selection will be done on the merit of candidate. It is also interesting that the cost of the application form has been levied at Rs. 25/- which is also hit by the provisions of RTE Act, 2009.


It is submitted that the above procedure for admission through entrance test for admission of students in class VI in these schools is prohibited by Section.13 of The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act, 2009). It is further submitted that under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (2) of Section.13 of the RTE Act, 2009 such screening procedure is an offence punishable with fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees for the first contravention and fifty thousand rupees for each subsequent contravention.


Your attention is invited to the provisions of Section.13 of the RTE Act, 2009 which are reproduced as under:

“Section 13 (1) No school or person shall, while admitting a child, collect any capitation fee and subject the child or his or her parents or guardian to any screening procedure.

(2) Any school or person, if in contravention of the provision of sub-section (1),-

(a) receives capitation fee, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to ten times the capitation fee charged;

(b) subjects a child to screening procedure, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees for the first contravention and fifty thousand rupees for each subsequent contraventions.”


Your kind attention is also invited to Section 2(o) of the RTE Act, 2009 which is reproduced as under:

Section 2(o) “screening procedure” means the method of selection for admission of a child, in preference over another, other than a random method;


From the mere reading of the aforementioned provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, it is abundantly clear that no school can subject a student to any screening procedure (which includes admission test) for his/her admission in classes I to VIII.


It is also submitted that the provisions of the much lauded RTE Act, 2009 have come into effect from April 1, 2010 and are, therefore, applicable to the admission of students in the academic year 2010-2011. It is submitted that the aforementioned procedure of admission to students in class VI in these schools as mentioned in the admission notice dated 28.03.2010 is in clear contravention of the provisions of Section.13 of RTE Act, 2009.


It is, therefore, requested that the aforementioned admission notice be withdrawn and another admission notice in conformity with the provisions of the RTE Act, 2009 should be published. It is also requested that your decision on the subject be intimated to the undersigned within three days of the receipt of this representation, failing which, we shall be constrained to file a Public Interest Litigation in the Hon’ble Delhi High Court questioning the validity of your aforesaid admission notice at your risk and costs.


With regards,

Ashok Agarwal, Advocate
Advisor, Social Jurist
M- 9811101923