Plaintiff In Title Suit Must Prove Own Case On Independent Evidence, Cannot Rely On Weakness Of Defence: Supreme Court Advocate Commissioner's Failure To Localize Land Per Title Deeds Fatal To Encroachment Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court Enmity Is A Double-Edged Weapon, Can Be Motive For False Implication As Much As For Crime: Allahabad High Court Parity In Bail: Karnataka High Court Grants Relief To Accused In Robbery Case As Mastermind & Main Offenders Were Already Enlarged Specific Performance Denied If Buyer Fails To Prove Continuous Readiness With Funds; Part-Payment Can't Be Forfeited Without Specific Clause: Delhi High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept In Police Stations For Long, Courts Must Judiciously Exercise Power To Release On Supurdagi: Madhya Pradesh High Court Prolonged Incarceration Militates Against Article 21, Constitutional Principles Must Override Section 37 NDPS Rigors: Punjab & Haryana High Court Onus On Individual To Prove Claim Of 'Fear Of Religious Persecution' For Exemption Under Foreigners Act: Calcutta High Court Direct Recruits Cannot Claim Seniority From A Date Prior To Their Entry Into The Cadre: Orissa High Court Sale Deed Executed After Land Vests In State Confers No Title; Post-Vesting Purchaser Can’t Claim Compensation: Calcutta High Court No Right To Blanket Regularization For Contractual Staff; State Must Timely Fill Sanctioned Vacancies Under Reserved Quota: Supreme Court Non-Signatory Collaborator Under 'Deed Of Joint Undertaking' Can Invoke Arbitration Clause As A 'Veritable Party': Supreme Court Insolvency Proceedings Cannot Be Used As Coercive Recovery Mechanism For Complex Contractual Disputes: Supreme Court Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To Sale Cannot Challenge Transfer Under PTCL Act After Long Delay: Supreme Court SC/ST Act | Proceedings To Annul Sale Illegal If Initiated By Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To The Transaction: Supreme Court Consumers Cannot Be Burdened With Tariff Charges Beyond Period Of Service Delivery: Supreme Court Mere Non-Production Of Old Selection Records Or Non-Publication Of All Candidates' Marks No Ground To Direct Appointment: Supreme Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals Against Acquittal In Sohrabuddin Shaikh Encounter Case; Says Prosecution Failed To Prove Conspiracy Dishonour Of Cheque Due To Signature Mismatch Or Incomplete Signature Attracts Section 138 NI Act: Supreme Court 138 NI Act | High Court Cannot Let Off Accused In NI Act Case By Ordering Only Cheque Amount Payment Without Interest Or Penalty: Supreme 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