IBC Moratorium Under Part III Does Not Shield Directors From Personal Criminal Liability In Cheque Bounce Cases U/S 138 NI: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act Is Predominantly Criminal; IBC Moratorium Stays Recovery Of Compensation But Not Prosecution: Supreme Court Refers To 3-Judge Bench Bus Driver Not Negligent If Vehicle Moved Based On Conductor's Whistle; Not Expected To Look Back For Alighting Passengers: Supreme Court Compassionate Assistance Received By Widow Cannot Be Deducted To Negate Compensation Payable To Dependent Mother Ineligible For Such Benefit: Supreme Court Section 37 Jurisdiction Is A Narrowing Pyramid; Courts Should Not Reopen Settled Jurisdictional Issues: Supreme Court Arbitration Award Passed Without Court Leave During Pendency Of Suit Is Unenforceable Under 1940 Act: Supreme Court Notice In Mutation Proceedings Constitutes Constructive Notice Of Probate; Revocation Plea Barred By Limitation: Supreme Court Breach Of Position Limits Is A Regulatory Infraction, Not Automatic Market Fraud; Supreme Court Sets Aside Reliance RPL Disgorgement Order Mere Breach Of Position Limits Not 'Fraud' Under PFUTP Regulations Unless Manipulation Or Inducement Is Proven: Supreme Court SC Awards ₹11 Lakh Compensation To Convict For 24-Day Delay In Release; Says State Must 'Obey First, Appeal Later' Compensation For Village Fazalwas Land Acquisition No Longer Res Integra; Supreme Court Dismisses Enhancement Claim Citing Previous Precedent Uncommunicated Adverse Remarks Cannot Form Basis To Terminate Probationer; Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Employer Cannot Use 'Unsatisfactory Performance' As Guise To Bypass Disciplinary Inquiry For Misconduct: Supreme Court Statutory Body Cannot Act As Both Investigator And Judge; Adjudicatory Process Must Be Neutrally Conducted: Supreme Court Removal Of Mathadhipati Vitiated If Relied-Upon Documents Not Supplied; Service By Affixation On Seized Premises Is A Legal Absurdity: Supreme Court Serving Notice By Affixing It To Door Of Premises Already Seized By State Is A Legal Absurdity: Supreme Court Initiating Criminal Case After Final Settlement Of Loan Account Is An Abuse Of Process; Sanctity Of OTS Must Be Protected: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Under Sections 420 & 471 IPC Cannot Continue After Bank Loan Settlement Approved By DRT: Supreme Court RTE Act: Use Of 'Teacher' In Section 23 Shows Intent To Make TET Mandatory For In-Service Staff, Not Retrospective: Supreme Court Service Of Teachers Cannot Come At Cost Of Educational Future Of Children: Supreme Court Extends TET Deadline To 2028 Right To Know Biological Father Prevails Over Right To Privacy; DNA Test Can Be Ordered To Resolve Paternity: Supreme Court DNA | Child’s Right To Identity & Closure Outweighs Putative Father’s Right To Privacy In Paternity Disputes: Supreme Court Approver’s Testimony Doesn’t Require Corroboration Of Every Material Circumstance; Rule Of Prudence Requires Only Connecting Link To Accused: Supreme Court Conspirator Liable For All 'Reasonably Foreseeable' Crimes Committed By Others In Furtherance Of Conspiracy: Supreme Court Rent Enhancement Orders Under UP Rent Act Must Apply Retrospectively From Date Of Filing Application: Supreme Court High Court Can’t Enhance Rent Under Article 227 Based On Mere Statements Without Evidence; Power To Be Exercised Sparingly: Supreme Court Parrot Testimony | Verbatim Repetition Of Allegations In Child's Statement Indicates Tutoring; POCSO Complaint Filed As 'Counter-Blast' Liable To Be Quashed: Supreme Court Matrimonial Disputes Often Witness Vague POCSO Allegations To Settle Personal Scores: Supreme Court Quashes Case Against Husband & In-Laws

Right to Education does not Entitle a Child to Admission in a Particular School of Choice: Delhi HC in Jiya’s Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court, in a significant judgment, has clarified that the right to education under Article 21A of the Constitution and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, does not guarantee a child admission to a particular school of choice.

The Court held that the right to education entitles a child only to free and compulsory education till the age of fourteen and does not extend to securing admission in a specific school.

 

The case concerned Jiya, a child from the Economically Weaker Section (EWS), who sought admission in Class II at Maharaja Agrasen Model School for the academic year 2023-24. She was denied admission in Class I in the previous year despite being shortlisted in a computerized draw by the Directorate of Education (DoE).

Eligibility for Admission under EWS Category: The Court noted that eligibility for admission under the EWS category requires application, shortlisting in a computerized draw, and allocation to a specific school for a specific academic year.

Direction to Admit in Specific School: The Court found that the DoE’s directive to admit Jiya in a specific school for the previous academic year was unenforceable as the right to admission does not carry forward automatically to subsequent years.

Role of DoE in Admission Process: The judgment underscored that the DoE’s role is subject to specific conditions and does not grant perpetual rights to admission in any subsequent academic year.

Decision of the Court:  The petition for Jiya’s admission to Class II in the specific school was rejected due to the absence of an application for that academic year. The Court, however, directed the DoE to secure Jiya’s admission in another school as an EWS student for Class II.

Date of Decision: March 22, 2024.

Jiya Through Her Next Friend and Natural Mother Ms. Sushma vs Maharaja Agrasen Model School & Anr.

Latest Legal News