Rajasthan High Court Orders Tehsildar To Personally Pay ₹2 Lakh Compensation For 53-Day Illegal Detention Despite Suspension Of Sentence Law Does Not Countenance Resurrection Of Stale Claims Through Inventive Drafting: Karnataka High Court Rejects 20-Year-Old Partition Dispute CPC Provisions Cannot Be Used to Transfer Consumer Complaints Across States: NCDRC Invokes Section 62 to End Forum-Shifting Ordeal in Nirmal Spinning Mills Case FSSA Provisions Prevail Over PFA Act In Cases Of Overlapping Jurisdiction, Prosecution Under Old Act Impermissible: J&K High Court Motive Pales Into Significance When Direct Ocular Evidence Establishes Crime; Enmity Is A Double-Edged Sword: Allahabad High Court Plaintiff Cannot Succeed Merely On Weakness Of Defence; Initial Burden To Prove Claim Rests On Claimant: Madras High Court Witness Threats Noted By Higher Courts Disentitle Convict To Suspension Of Sentence: Gujarat High Court Family Court Orders Must Be Enforced Immediately, Pendency Of Applications No Excuse For Disobedience: Delhi High Court 'Fraud And Justice Never Dwell Together': Karnataka High Court Reverses Order To Grant Land Based On Fabricated Records Development Authority Competent To Sanction Land Use Conversion From Residential To Nursing Home If Permitted Under Master Plan & Zoning Regulations: Allahabad High Court Notification Changing Import Policy From 'Free' To 'Restricted' Operative Only From Exact Time Of Publication In E-Gazette: Delhi High Court On Name Of Protection of the Complainer Excluding Relevant Defence Evidence in Sexual Offences Trials May Breach Fair Trial Rights: UK Supreme Court Boundaries In Sale Deed Prevail Over Discrepancy In Property Description; Adverse Possession Begins From Date Of Hostile Notice: Punjab & Haryana HC Supreme Court of UK Upholds HMRC Decision: Professional Fees Incurred by Investment Holding Company Are Capital Expenditure Criminal Law Cannot Be Used To Silence Citizens Questioning Legality Of Police Action: Madras High Court Quashes Obstruction Case Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs Centre To Treat Ashok Khemka As Empaneled For Future Assignments, Says Denying Relaxation Granted To Peers Is Discriminatory Section 34 Court Cannot Substitute Arbitrator’s Plausible View With Its Own; Not Bound By Technical Rules Of Evidence Act: Madras High Court Article 227 Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Reopen Decrees Finalized Four Decades Ago: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Challenge To 1985 Order Daughter Has No Right To Inherit Agricultural Land If Succession Opened Before 2005 HSA Amendment: Delhi High Court Rejects Plaint Indian Trust Act Inapplicable To Public Religious Endowments; Sale Of Charity Property Without HR&CE Commissioner's Permission Void: Madras High Court Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Collateral Warranties Under Construction Contracts FIR Quashed Against Newsclick: PMLA Proceedings Cannot Stand Alone Without A Predicate Offence, Rules Delhi High Court Assessee Claiming TDS Exemption On "Reimbursement" To Non-Residents Must Obtain Mandatory Tax Determination Under Section 195(2): Madras High Court

Non-Provision of Statutory Benefits to Students is Arbitrary and Violates Fundamental Rights: Delhi High Court Orders Immediate Action

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Delhi High Court emphatically stated that “fundamental rights cannot be trampled upon,” mandating immediate action to provide educational materials in kind, rather than cash, to students in GNCTD and MCD-run schools.

Legal Context: The court addressed systemic failures under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), and other relevant statutes, focusing on the non-provision of uniforms, textbooks, and other educational necessities, which it deemed a violation of Article 21-A of the Constitution.

Facts and Issues: The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) highlighted that over 650,000 students were being deprived of statutory educational benefits due to bureaucratic inertia and administrative inefficiencies within the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD). Notably, many students lacked bank accounts, a prerequisite for the cash transfer method currently employed.

Administrative Shortcomings: The Court pointed out the lack of coordination and operational standing committees within the MCD, contributing to the failure to provide materials directly to students.

Violation of Statutory Obligations: It was emphasized that the GNCTD and MCD’s approach breached statutory obligations by failing to distribute educational materials directly, as mandated under the RTE Act.

Need for Immediate Rectification: The Court criticized the ongoing administrative delays and emphasized the necessity of immediate action, given the upcoming academic breaks, underscoring the urgency of fulfilling constitutional and statutory obligations.

Decision: The High Court directed the immediate delegation of financial powers to the MCD Commissioner to resolve procurement issues and criticized the administrative inertia that led to repeated failures. The GNCTD and MCD are to ensure that educational materials are provided directly to students forthwith, without waiting for bureaucratic processes that delay the fulfillment of these fundamental rights.

Date of Decision: April 29, 2024

Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors

 

Latest Legal News