Access to education is a fundamental right

Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court observed that receiving adequate education is a fundamental right enshrined in Article 21-A of the Constitution of India.

The bench consisting of Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Subhash Vidyarthi further observed that education authorities must ensure that the grievance relating to admission to an institution is resolved quickly and does not go unanswered.

The bench dealt with the case of a certain Tanishk Srivastava, a pupil of class 8.

He participated in the entrance test organized on March 20 to be admitted as a resident researcher at La Martiniere College, Lucknow, in class 8.

On March 25, the results were announced and Tanishk was declared successful and eligible for admission to class 8 as a resident researcher.

However, due to his mother’s serious illness and his father’s absence, he was unable to join the school.

Therefore, his father filed an application on April 4 in front of the school management and hoped that instead of treating his son as a resident scholar, he could be admitted as an external scholar because he is ready to fulfill all the formalities required, including fees. .

When the appellant/petitioner, the candidate’s father, was not informed of the fate of his son’s admission until April 18, he filed a motion for an order in court which was denied by a single judge.

Disputing the writ petition, the candidate’s father filed an immediate appeal to the divisional bench.

The court upheld the single judge’s order which rejected the writ plea on the grounds that since the institution was an unassisted minority private institution, therefore, the writ petition against it could not be granted.

However, before dismissing the appeal, the court observed that the institution should have conveyed the specific information (whether Tanishk can be admitted to the school as a resident scholar) to the student’s parents at the earliest so that appropriate measures can be taken by his parents.

Allahabad High Court said: “This is not a case where the student failed to qualify the entrance exam to be admitted to a particular class, but this is a case where this student qualified for this entrance exam as a resident scholar, but due to compelling and unavoidable circumstances, he could not be admitted as a resident scholar.

“Therefore, in such compelling circumstances, at least on the basis of principles of fairness, it was the bare minimum required of the school principal to inform the pupil’s parents that the school would not would not be able to admit their ward in class 8 as an external student.

The bench also held that if the request of the pupil/parents of the pupil was not likely to be accepted by the school, this decision should have been immediately communicated to the parents so that the pupil could be admitted to any other establishment to receive the education which is a fundamental right enshrined in Article 21-Aa.

(To receive our electronic document daily on WhatsApp, please click here. To receive it on Telegram, please click here. We allow sharing of the PDF of the document on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)


About Leslie Schwartz

Check Also

An analytical approach to inclusion

EUROPE The creation of the European Higher Education Area has led to changes in universities …