SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 5726

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.
Master Singham - Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Education Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi Private School Branch Old Sett: Delhi 54 & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 4006 of 2021 & CM Appl. 12085 of 2021
Decided On : 05-12-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Vaibhav Sethi, Ms. Priya Pathania, Mr.Vikhyat Oberoi, Ms. Jagriti Pandey, Mr.Onmichon Ramlal, Mr. Mohit Garg, Mr. Rana Bed, Ms. Diksha Kakkar and Mr. Aditya Khanna, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Standing Counsel for GNCTD with Mr. Arun Panwar, Mr. Pradyumn Rao and Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Advocate, Mr. Siddharth Nath, Ms. Khushboo Hora and Mr. Anunay Chowdhary, Advocate, for the Respondent.

Admission under EWS category must be based on truthful declarations; fraudulent admissions undermine educational welfare schemes.

Headnote:(A) Delhi School Education Act, 1973 - Section 3(1) - Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - Admission under EWS category - Petitioner secured admission based on fraudulent income certificate - Admission cancelled after investigation revealed misrepresentation of income and residence - Court emphasized the importance of truthful declarations to safeguard educational rights of economically weaker sections. (Paras 3, 42, 51, 106)

(B) Natural Justice - Principles of natural justice - Petitioner claimed denial of fair hearing - Court found adequate opportunity provided to present case - No real prejudice caused by procedural aspects; ruling upheld. (Paras 20, 42, 60, 106)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a minor, was admitted to a school under the EWS category based on an income certificate claiming his father's income to be Rs. 67,200, later found to be fraudulent as actual income was over Rs. 4 lakhs. (Paras 6, 12, 13)

Findings of Court:
Admission was cancelled due to fraudulent means employed to secure a seat, highlighting the importance of integrity in educational admissions. (Paras 106, 120)

Issues: 1. Whether the admission was obtained through fraud? 2. Whether the principles of natural justice were violated? (Paras 42, 51)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that admission secured through false declarations undermines the purpose of educational welfare schemes; procedural fairness was upheld as sufficient opportunities were provided. (Paras 106, 120)

Result: Petition dismissed; admission to remain under General category with costs imposed. (Paras 120)

JUDGMENT

1. Satyam Vada, Dharmam Chara, which literally translates to speak the truth, pursue righteousness', referenced from the Taittireeya Upanishad, reckons the conviction of the ancient education system of Bharat, wherein, the aforesaid exhortation was sermonized during the convocation ceremonies of disciples to sum up the objective of education. It is, undoubtedly, the pillars of truth which make the superstructure of education stand firm and tall. It is also a truism that nothing could refine and develop human intellect except vidya (education). In spiritual realm, it leads to liberation of self and in the mundane spheres, it encompasses a holistic growth and prosperity.

2. The exaltation of ethics and morality has invigorated education to bloom to its pinnacle and the education would lose its purpose if the said conditions were negated from it. In fact, it is the duty of an egalitarian society to march towards accessible education for all, guided by the tenets of morality. The pious fountain of education, therefore, must be reached out with utmost integrity and any surreptitious attempt to dislodge such piousness must be checked and corrected.

3. The present case, on the contrary, enunciates a harrowing tale of blatant subversion of a welfare scheme enacted for extending the benefit of quality education to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) of the society. The case at hand, reflects a tormenting state of affairs where the opulent class is putting in blood, sweat and tears to reap the benefits of EWS reservation at the expense of the economically marginalized candidates. A calculated attempt at subverting the cherished constitutional vision of education for all is under scrutiny in this case.

4. The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, with an objective of fulfilling the aspirations of students belonging to economically downtrodden sections of the society to attain quality education, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973 (18 of 1973) read with Rule 43 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 under the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, passed an Order, namely Delhi School Education (Free seats for Students belonging to Economically Weaker Sections and Disadvantage Group) Order, 2011 (hereinafter as 200)11 Order'), providing free seats for such students. As per the 2011 Order, all the schools are required to admit children belonging to economically weaker section in class one to the extent of at least twenty-five percent of the strength of that class and provide free and compulsory elementary education till its completion.

5. Clause 2(c) of the said Order defines a child belonging to weaker section as the one whose parents have total annual income of less than one lakh rupees from all sources and who have been staying in Delhi for the last three years.

6. The petitioner in the instant case is a minor student whose father, on 08.01.2013, got the requisite income certificate issued by the Tehsildar in the office of the Deputy Commissioner (New Delhi District) to secure admission for his son in Sanskriti School, New Delhi. The said certificate assessed the annual income of the petitioner's father to be Rs. 67, 200/- from all sources.

7. The facts of the case show that the petitioner got admitted in respondent no.2-School in 2013, availing the quota for EWS on the basis of the aforementioned income certificate of his father.

8. The domicile certificate dated 18.02.2012, issued by the Executive Magistrate in the office of the Deputy Commissioner (New Delhi District) and duly attested by a Judicial Member of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, was also submitted to show that the petitioner resided along with his parents in Sanjay Camp, Chanankya Puri, Delhi.

9. After admission, the petitioner c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top