P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Siddharth International Public School v. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and Anr. - (High Court of Delhi) (21 Sep 2016)

25% admission to children belonging to EWS under the RTE Act cannot be held to be upper limit

MANU/DE/2570/2016

Education

Master Priyanshu, aged about 7 years, was injured in a motor accident and his left leg was amputated below knee. Petition for compensation is pending before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT). Mother of injured boy moved an application seeking a direction that, boy be admitted in a school under 'Economically Weaker Section’ (EWS Category). Petitioner assailed direction by MACT and order of Single Judge that, Appellant school shall grant admission to Master Priyanshu in Class I.

25% admission to children belonging to EWS under the RTE Act cannot be held to be upper limit. Intendment of Act is to provide admission to the children belonging to weaker sections in all schools to the extent of at least 25%. In terms of sub-Section (2) of Section 12 of RTE Act, unaided schools which provided free and compulsory elementary education to children belonging to weaker section and disadvantaged group in neighbourhood, including Appellant school would be reimbursed the expenditure so incurred and that no prejudice would be caused to Appellant school by complying with directions in order under appeal.

Admittedly, this is a case where Master Priyanshu is not only a child belonging to weaker section but he is also a differently abled child with a prosthetic leg. Appellant school is located in locality where boy resides. Therefore, Single Judge was fully justified in directing Appellant school to admit Master Priyanshu in Ist Standard. Court while rejecting the appeal was of the view that, Appellant school cannot be allowed to escape from statutory mandate merely on ground that during the pendency of writ petition, boy was admitted in a local municipal school.

Relevant : Section 12 of Right to Education Act, 2009

Tags : ADMISSION   GRANT   WEAKER SECTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved