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
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
Kalinga Mining Corporation Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.
Automotive Tyre Manufacturers Association v. Designated Authority and Others
Mohd. Sartaj & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Ossein and Gelatine Manufacturers' Association of India v. Modi Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd. & Anr.
Unnikrishnan JP v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Central Bank of India v. Madhulika Guruprasad Dahir
Dwarkanath v. Income-Tax Officer, Special Circle, Kanpur
Udyami Evam Khadi Gramodyog Welfare Sanstha v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Ramjas Foundation v. Union of India
K.R. Srinivas v. R.M. Premchand
Ramniklal N. Bhutta v. State of Maharashtra
V. Chandrasekaran v. Administrative Officer
Ramniklal N. Bhutta v. State of Maharashtra
Enderby Town Football Club Ltd. v. Football Assn. Ltd.
Jain Exports (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
Suresh Koshy George v. University of Kerala
State of Kerala v. K. T. Shaduli Grocery Dealer
Karnataka SRTC v. S.G. Kotturappa
Gorkha Security Services v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi)
Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal
Union of India v. Jyoti Prakash Mitter
State of J&K v. Bakshi Gulam Mohammad
Kalinga Mining Corpn. v. Union of India
Tata Cellular v. Union of India
Regina v. Race Relations Board, Ex parte Selvarajan
Gullappalli Nageswara Rao v. APSRTC
P.D. Agrawal v. State Bank of India
Aligarh Muslim University v. Mansoor Ali Khan
K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India
State Bank of Patiala v. S.K. Sharma
Rajendra Singh v. State of M.P.
Viveka Nand Sethi v. Chairman, J&K Bank Ltd.
State of U.P. v. Neeraj Awasthi
Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India
Admission under EWS category must be based on truthful declarations; fraudulent admissions undermine educational welfare schemes.
The court upheld the necessity of a valid income certificate for admission under the EWS category, emphasizing compliance with educational guidelines.
The court affirmed that the RTE Act mandates at least 25% admission for economically weaker section students in private schools, emphasizing compliance over restriction based on general admissions.
The right to education under the RTE Act does not guarantee admission to a specific school, and residency criteria based on wards must be clarified by the State.
The specific application, shortlisting, and allocation process by the Directorate of Education are essential for EWS student admissions, and without these, there is no enforceable right to seek admis....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.