Case Name: Social Jurist v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors
Case No.: W.P.(C) 888/2024
Dated: April 29, 2024
Quorum: Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The facts of the case revolve around The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (the “RTE Act”), read with the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 and the Delhi Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 (the “RTE Rules”), has been filed as a public interest lawsuit (PIL) to draw attention to the fact that 2,69,488 students enrolled in schools run by the Directorate of Education, GNCTD, and 3,83,203 students enrolled in schools run by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) are being denied access to the statutory benefits like uniform, writing materials, books, stationery items, school bags, scholarships, etc.
The Fundamental Right to Education, which is protected to pupils under Article 21-A of the Constitution, is violated when GNCTD and MCD fail to provide the students with the aforementioned statutory advantages in a timely manner. This failure is arbitrary and unethical.
It is mentioned that all students attending GNCTD and MCD-run schools have the right to free textbooks, writing supplies, and uniforms under Rule 8 of the RTE Rules. Nevertheless, it is claimed that instead of giving away free text books, writing supplies, and uniforms, GNCTD and MCD are paying students directly from their bank accounts.
3,83,203 pupils enrolled in MCD-run schools have been denied these statutory benefits due to a lack of bank accounts from the 2016–17 academic year to the 2022–23 academic year, according to the Chief Auditor, MCD, in his Audit Memo of November 14, 2023. In a similar vein, the Directorate of Education, GNCTD (the “DoE”) letter dated December 29, 2023 notes that 2,69,488 kids enrolled in schools managed by the GNCTD have likewise been denied statutory financial advantages due to the lack of active bank accounts.
When GNCTD and MCD neglect to promptly supply the students with the aforementioned statutory advantages, they are infringing upon their constitutionally guaranteed Fundamental Right to Education (Article 21-A). This is an inequitable and arbitrary failure.
A civil rights organisation is the petitioner, Social Jurist. Nearly 10,000 unregistered and unrecognised schools in various Delhi neighbourhoods are at issue in this case. NGOs, institutions, and private persons manage these schools. These schools educate about 600,000 students in a range of classes from LKG to 12th grade, who are between the ages of 2 and 18.
CONTENTIONS OF THE PETITIONER:
The petitioners strongly contended that the reply to affidavit of the DoE dated March 23, 2023, filed in has been cited by Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, the petitioner’s learned counsel. He said that the GNCTD has testified in this affidavit before this Court that all students in government-run schools in classes “preschool” through “VIII” receive a full set of textbooks at no cost to them after having them printed by the Delhi Bureau of Textbooks, along with workbooks and other supplementary materials were provided.
The petitioners further contend that GNCTD has represented that writing supplies (notebooks and stationery) will be given “in kind” to students starting with the academic year 2023–2024. In this regard, the heads of the school(s) in question have been given permission to buy writing supplies and give them to the students enrolled in the aforementioned schools starting in the academic year 2023–2024. In addition, the GNCTD has announced that starting with the academic year 2024–2025, the Head of School(s) will have the authority to purchase uniforms and provide them to the students; in the interim, pupils will get payment in cash for the academic year 2023–2024.
Therefore, thye conteded, it is essential that the MCD immediately provide its students with the statutory benefits “in kind” in lieu of cash, pending the resolution of the bank account opening issue. This will ensure that the students’ Fundamental Rights are protected and they receive the statutory guaranteed uniforms, note books, stationery items, school bags, etc. for the current academic session of 2024–2025.
He said that the current petitioner has also brought attention to the issue of the lack of infrastructure in the form of dilapidated buildings, classrooms, etc. in the schools of GNCTD and MCD, and this Court is taking it into consideration. He said that there are schools that are set up and operated fully in a tin shed, and that the summer months are difficult for the pupils and teachers who work there, respectively. According to him, there are schools where there is no furniture and students attend classes while sitting on the floor. He declared that the problem of damaged chairs and desks in classrooms is an urgent one that affects every school.
CONTENTIONS OF THE RESPONDENTS:
The respondent’s counsel acknowledged that they are required to give statutory benefits, such as school bags, note books, stationery, uniforms, etc., to the students “in kind” rather than in cash. For the 2022–2023 academic year, these statutory benefits were given “in kind” to the students enrolled in MCD schools. It is said that, however, due to procurement difficulties, these statutory advantages could not be given to students “in kind” for the academic year 2023–2024. As a result, students with bank accounts received payment for these benefits in cash.
The absence of bank accounts is acknowledged as the reason 2,73,346 students were not able to receive the required benefits under the RTE Rules during the 2023–2024 academic year.
The respondent, who joined the proceedings via video conference on April 23, 2024, informed this court that the Standing Committee of MCD, which does have the necessary financial power, is non-functional, and that it is not possible for him to provide the students with “in kind” benefits for the academic year 2023–2024 because neither he nor the Commissioner have the necessary financial power to award contracts for the procurement of these statutory items.
The respondents further acknowledged that, in a similar vein, MCD has not been able to award contracts for the procurement of the aforementioned items because it lacks the necessary financial power, and as a result, has not been able to obtain the statutory benefits for the current academic session of 2024–2025, such as uniforms, note books and stationery items, school bags, etc. for distribution “in kind” to the students. According to the Commissioner, contracts over the financial limit of INR Five crores can only be awarded by the Standing Committee, which also has the authority to do so. As a result, he acknowledged that he was unable to fulfil his legal duties to the students.
LEGAL PROVISIONS:
Section 10(1) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 (DSE Act): The petitioner requested that the recommendations of the 7th Pay Commission be applied to the salaries of teaching and non-teaching staff at Delhi’s independent private schools. The argument was founded on DSE Act Section 10(1), which deals with the salary, perks, and allowances of staff members working in private schools.
7th Pay Commission Recommendations: Employees of private schools that operate independently should be covered by these guidelines, according to the petitioner. Whether the DSE Act required these suggestions to be implemented was a question the court addressed.
Article 21 of the Constitution of India: The petitioner claimed that it was a violation of their fundamental rights to deny access to specific medical facilities to individuals who were not Delhi residents. The right to personal liberty and life is guaranteed by Article 21.
COURT’S ANALYSIS AND JUDGMENT:
The non-constitution of the Standing Committee of the MCD since 2023 is a matter of record, and this court would like to note that the non-procurement and its effect of not providing the statutory benefits of uniforms, note books and stationery items, school bags, etc. to the students studying in the MCD schools, first for the academic session of 2023–24 and now 2024–2025, is an undesirable and regrettable state of affairs.
The MCD Commissioner further acknowledged that as GNCTD is still in the process of producing and acquiring the textbooks, kids in MCD schools have not yet gotten any from the organisation. School will be closed for summer vacation starting on May 10, 2024, and the current academic session began on April 1, 2024. For this reason, the first session has practically ended without the students’ use of textbooks, notepads, writing supplies, stationery, etc. Taking into account the previously mentioned details, this Court finds it difficult to envision the inadequate level of instruction provided to the pupils during this inaugural session without these essential resources, to which they are legally and constitutionally entitled.
In order to fill the void left by the Standing Committee’s unconstitutionality, the Court expressed a preliminary opinion that the Commissioner, MCD, should be given more financial authority by a suitable GNCTD authority. This will allow the Commissioner to grant contracts for the purchase of these statutory benefits for the MCD schools’ students.
The court noted that there was potential for regulation of the right to establish an educational institution. However, these regulations did not go so far as to impose a strict tuition schedule, prescribe the structure and makeup of the governing body, or require private school employees and instructors to be nominated.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgment reviewed by Riddhi S Bhora.
