Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

EWS/DG Students’ Admission Cannot be Compromised: Delhi High Court Upholds Rights of EWS Students in School Admissions

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment that underscores the importance of education for children from economically weaker sections (EWS), the High Court of Delhi has ruled in favor of upholding the ‘Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009’ (RTE Act). The case (W.P.(C) 5194/2023) involved a dispute over the admission of a five-year-old child, Amitanjali Tiwari, under the EWS category at the Sovereign School.

Justice C. Hari Shankar, presiding over the matter, observed that the essence of the RTE Act is to ensure the educational upliftment of underprivileged children. The Court highlighted that schools are mandated to admit a minimum of 25% EWS/DG students and clarified the principle of carrying forward unfilled EWS/DG vacancies from the previous academic year.

In his judgment, Justice Shankar stated, “Admitting of EWS/DG students to the extent of at least 25% of the strength of its entry-level class is the statutory obligation of every school which falls within Section 2(n)(iv) of the RTE Act.” The Court noted that this obligation extends to carrying forward unfilled vacancies to the next year, should there be a shortfall.

The case centered around the denial of admission to Amitanjali Tiwari by the Sovereign School, despite being eligible and following the DOE’s directives. The petitioner, represented by her mother, Anjali Pandey, approached the Court after the school repeatedly denied admission.

The High Court’s decision was partly in favor of the petitioner. While Amitanjali will continue her current academic session as an EWS student at Sovereign School, the Directorate of Education (DOE) has been directed to ensure her admission in a neighboring school as an EWS/DG candidate for the next academic year.

Justice Shankar emphasized the DOE’s critical role in ensuring compliance with the RTE Act and remarked, “It is the responsibility of the school concerned to bring any error to the notice of the DOE on release of the first intimation by the DOE and within the time provided therein.”

This landmark ruling is seen as a significant step in reinforcing the rights of EWS children to education and ensuring that schools adhere to their statutory obligations under the RTE Act.

Date of Decision: 29 January 2024

ANJALI PANDEY VS GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

 

Latest Legal News