JUDGMENT 1. (Oral) - Munish Kumar Sharma the advocate practicing in this Court by means of this public interest litigation has prayed that for admission in class-I and nursery, the entrance examination of the children should not be conducted nor the parents or the children be interviewed by such schools and educational institutions. 2. By the first order dated 1st February, 2006, notices were issued to the respondents No. 3 to 5 and also the direction was given to implead Director, Elementary Education, Government of Rajasthan as party respondent No. 6. The Court directed that until further order the respondents 1 No. 3 to 5 shall not hold any written test for the purpose of admission to the primary section in their school. 3. On 10th February, 2006, the Association of Unaided Private Schools (hereinafter to be referred by as 'Association') appeared before the Court on its own. By the subsequent order dated 20th April, 2006 the association of unaided schools was impleaded as party respondent No. 7. 4. On 9th February, 2007, it was thought fit by the Bench to look into the report of the Ganguli Committee constituted pursuance to the directions of Delhi High Court. The parties were directed to give their suggestions/comments on the basis of said report. 5. On 21st March, 2007, the Additional Advocate General stated before the Court that the State Government has by its order dated 13th March, 2007 constituted a committee headed by Director, Elementary Education Council (hereinafter referred 'State Committee' by us) to make suggestions in the light of the report of the Ganguli report. The matter was, accordingly adjourned. 6. On 18th May, 2007, the Additional Advocate General tendered the application for taking on record the compliance report as per the order dated 1st March, 2007. Alongwith that report of the State Committee was placed on record. 7. On 18th July, 2007, Mr. N.K. Maloo, the counsel for the Association (respondent No. 7) submitted that general body would meet to discuss the report submitted by the State Committee. Accordingly the matter was adjourned for today. 8. At the outset Mr. N.K. Maloo, the counsel for the Association submitted that they did not have anything to add to what has already been submitted pursuant to the order dated 10th February, 2006 and 14th February, 2007. 9. We heard the Additional Advocate General, senior counsel and 30 counsel for the parties. 8. At the outset Mr. N.K. Maloo, the counsel for the Association submitted that they did not have anything to add to what has already been submitted pursuant to the order dated 10th February, 2006 and 14th February, 2007. 9. We heard the Additional Advocate General, senior counsel and 30 counsel for the parties. 10. As indicated above, the writ petition raises twin issues (one) admission to pre-primary (nursery) classes and (two) admission to Class-I (Standard-I). The aforesaid controversy of admission is in relation to the private unaided schools. 11. The present order deals with and is restricted to the controversy of admission to the nursery classes in the unaided private schools. 12. The issue concerning the admission of young children to pre-primary class (nursery schools) is of vital importance, besides the children themselves, to the parents, educationists, school administration, child educators, child care givers and others. That the written test and the interview of the children of such tender age (3-4 years) for admission to pre primary classes/nursery classes is traumatic to such nascent mind cannot be denied; it is loaded with tension to parents as well. The efforts have been made, the exercises done internationally as well as nationally to find out the ways and means in eliminating the existing method of conducting written test and holding interviews of the young children for admission to the nursery classes. 13. This very issue was raised before the Delhi High Court. The Delhi High Court constituted the committee of experts headed by the Chairman, 50 Central Board of Secondary Education, popularly known as `Ganguli Committee' to look into various aspects including the entire process leading to the admission of young children in nursery schools and the elimination of interview and the suggestions to make such admission process transparent and minimise the discretion of the management/principal. The Ganguli Committee, as it transpires from its report, in their efforts to evolve a common, rational admission process invited (i) the representations from Associations of the Schools; (ii) comments from parents and (iii) interviewed large number of persons. They also sought suggestions from educationists, school administration and parents through their website and other modes of communication. They referred to relevant statutory provisions. 14. The Ganguli Committee in part III of the report made its recommendations. They also sought suggestions from educationists, school administration and parents through their website and other modes of communication. They referred to relevant statutory provisions. 14. The Ganguli Committee in part III of the report made its recommendations. The Ganguli Committee held the firm view that the private unaided schools should do away with interview of/interaction with children' parents and that there should be no observation of children either in formal or informal conditions to decide their admission. According to the Ganguli Committee report, their would be no overall lottery system adopted to select/shortlist children for admission. However in the calculation of overall weightage points if at any stage number of applicants exceed the number of available seats, limited use of lottery system could be adopted from within the applicants at that stage to select children for admission. In paragraph 5.2, the Ganguli Committee, recommended pre-admission procedure. A standardised registration form was recommended in paragraph 5.3. The constitution of admission committee and its functions were suggested in paragraph 5.4. The time schedule for admission was provided in paragraph 5.5 and the admission process including criterion scale was suggested in paragraph 5.6. School specific parameters were suggested in paragraph 5.7. The minority schools established under Article 30(1) of the Constitution were excluded being special category schools. 15. It is necessary to notice here that the consideration of the issue relating to nursery admission in the private schools by the Ganguli Committee was confined to Delhi alone. It was for this reason that when the matter came up before this Court on 21st March, 2007 that the Additional Advocate General stated before the Court that the State Government has constituted a committee headed by the Director, Elementary Educational Council to make suggestions in the light of the report of Ganguli Committee The State Committee was required to examine the recommendation of the Ganguli Committee in the context of unaided private educational institutions in the State of Rajasthan. 16. The State Committee comprised of (one) Director, Rajasthan Primary Education Council, Jaipur, (two) Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidhayalaya Sangthan, Jaipur, (three) Deputy Director, Elementary Education, Jaipur Division, Jaipur and (four) Additional District Education Officer, Elementary Education (law), Jaipur. The Committee considered the relevant statutory provisions of Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989, Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1993, Rajasthan Primary Education Act, 1964 and the constitutional provisions contained in Article 21A and 45. The Committee considered the relevant statutory provisions of Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989, Rajasthan Non Government Educational Institutions Act, 1993, Rajasthan Primary Education Act, 1964 and the constitutional provisions contained in Article 21A and 45. The State Committee also kept in mind the recommendations of the Education Commission known as `Kothari Commission' (1964-66), the report of the Yashpal Committee and the National Education Policy, 1986. 17. Broadly, the State Committee concurred with the recommendations of the Ganguli Committee with some modification in regard to the admission committee. This is what the State Committee recommended in the light of the recommendations of the Ganguli Committee : HINDI MATTER 495261 18. Addiyionally in Chapter-6 of its report the Committee gave following suggestions : HINDI MATTER 19. Mr. N.K. Maloo, the counsel for the Association (respondent No. 7) made following submissions to the recommendations/suggestions of the State Committee: (i) That the pre primary education course must be of two years and not one year as suggested by the State Committee. It is necessary looking to the syllabus prescribed for first standard. Unless the pre-primary education course is of two years, the child shall not be able to cope with the syllabus of first standard. (ii) That the minimum age of the child at the time of admission to the pre-primary education course must be three plus and not four plus as recommended by the State Committee. (iii) Even if the written test of the child is dispensed with, there should be some method of informal interaction of the child and the parents with the school to enable the child and his parents to know about the institution. Such informal interaction helps the school is understanding the child to be admitted in the school. That the informal interaction between the child and parent on the one hand and the school administration on the other is not likely to have any adverse impact on the young child. (iv) That the admission to the non Government unaided private schools being the sole prerogative of its administration, there should not be any external interference in the matter of admission, and, therefore, there should not be appointment of any admission committee and the criterion for weightage on the ground of sibling, neighbourhood, qualification of the parents. Similarly the weightage of the wards of alumni should not be provided. Similarly the weightage of the wards of alumni should not be provided. The weightage on diverse aspects has no nexus to the object sought to be achieved. 20. Mr. N.K. Maloo placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of TMA Pie Foundation & others v. State of Karnataka and Others, (2002) 8 SCC 481 particularly paragraphs 36, 40 and 45 of the report. 21. The observations relied upon by Mr. N.K. Maloo in TMK Pie 5 Foundation read thus : "36. The private unaided educational institutions impart education, and that cannot be the reason to take away their choice in matters, inter alia, of selection of students and fixation of fees. Affiliation and recognition has to be available to every institution that fulfils the conditions for grant of such affiliation and recognition. The private institutions are right in submitting that it is not open to the Court to insist that statutory authorities should impose the terms of the scheme as a condition for grant of affiliation or recognition; this completely destroys the institutional autonomy and the very objection of establishment of the institution. 40. Any system of student selection would be unreasonable if it deprives the private unaided institution of the right of rational selection, which it devised for itself, subject to the minimum qualification that may be prescribed and to some system of computing the equivalence between different kinds of qualifications, like a common entrance test. Such a system of selection can involve both written and oral test for selection, based on principle of fairness. 45. In view of the discussion hereinabove, we hold that the decision in Unni Krishnan case insofar as it framed the scheme relating to the grant of admission and fixing of the fee, was not correct, and to that extent, the said decision and the consequent directions given to UGC, AICTE, the Medical Council of India, the Central and State Governments etc. are overruled." 22. are overruled." 22. It may been noticed here itself that in the case of TMA Pie Foundation inter-alia the contention under consideration was that the decision in the case of Unni Krishnan J.P. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1993(1) SCC 645 required reconsideration because the scheme framed therein imposed unreasonable restrictions on the private educational institutions and particularly in the case of minority institutions as the right guaranteed to them under Article 30(1) stood infringed and that the object that was sought to be achieved by the scheme was intact not achieved. Dealing with the scheme was infact not achieved. Dealing with the said question as to whether Unni Krishnan's case required reconsideration, the observations were made in paragraphs 36, 40 and 45 aforequoted. Of course on behalf of non minority institutions in the case of TMA Pie Foundation it was urged that the Constitution provided the fundamental right to establish and administer educational institutions and that right is contained in Article 19(1)(g) and/or Article 26 as well. 23. That the private unaided educational institutions deserve grater autonomy cannot be disputed. The question is : Whether the recommendations of the Ganguli Committee with regard to the admission process to pre-primary classes/nursery classes in the private unaided schools and accepted to by the State Committee would result in oppression to the unaided private educational institutions and act prejudicially to their right and interest. 24. We are of the view that, save and except, few modifications that we shall indicate hereinafter, framing of the scheme relating to the admission process to pre-primary classes/nursery classes in the light of the Ganguli Committee report and accepted by the State Committee, the right of the private unaided schools in the administration of their institutions would not be eroded. Rather it shall be for the welfare of the infant children and also help in laying strong foundations of child education in the State of Rajasthan, and, thus, the institutions shall be helping the society in their own way. It needs no emphasis that the rights contains in Articles 19(1)(g) and 26 are not absolute; these rights can always reasonably be regulated. 25. The Ganguli Committee records that from the suggestions and comments received from the representatives, parents and other stake holders, there was almost an agreement that interview of children and interaction with parents should be eliminated from the admission procedure in the pre-primary courses. 25. The Ganguli Committee records that from the suggestions and comments received from the representatives, parents and other stake holders, there was almost an agreement that interview of children and interaction with parents should be eliminated from the admission procedure in the pre-primary courses. The Ganguli Committee was not oblivious to the suggestion of few persons that informal interaction with parents would enable the institution to know their values and what they expect from the school as well as to verify the authenticity of information given in the registration forms. 26. In our thoughtful view, the written test or the interview of the infant children for their admission in the pre-primary classes/nursery classes may cause them great harm. It may be detrimental to their growth. Nor the interaction with the children and parents, in our view, is of any help insofar as admission to pre-primary classes is concerned. As a matter of fact the interview of the child or interaction with parents builds stressful condition both in the minds of infant child and the parents which must be avoided at the- stage of admission in pre-primary classes. We find ourselves in agreement with the recommendation of the Ganguli Committee report and accepted by the State Level Committee that the institutions having pre-primary classes/nursery classes must completely eliminate written test and interview of/interaction with children and parents and that there should not be any observation of the child either in formal or informal conditions to decide their admission. Such practice needs to be done away with henceforth in all private non aided institutions/schools providing pre- primary classes/nursery classes. 27. That to obviate high handedness, arbitrariness and any other extraneous consideration and that to ensure transparency in the admission process there has to be uniform pre-admission procedure in all such private unaided schools providing for pre-primary classes cannot be denied and, therefore, the recommendations made by the Ganguli Committee in paragraph 5.2 and concurred with the State Committee deserves to be accepted. For the sake of convenience we extract paragraph 5.2 of the Ganguli Committee report thus : "Pre Admission Procedure In order to ensure complete transparency in the admission process schools should declare the following particulars in the very beginning through website, school's notice Board and prospectus: (a) Number of seats available for admission (b) Number of seats to be filed through general category, from disadvantaged/underprivileged groups, if applicable and number of seats available under management quota, if any. (c)Dates, location and mode of distribution and receipt of registration forms. (d) Age group of children who are eligible to apply for the current academic session. (e) Information about the school's infrastructural facilities, faculty, facilities available for children with special needs, fee structure, past performance of the school in different fields etc. Schools may also declare, at least two weeks in advance, the dates from which the registration forms for nursery classes will be distributed. Forms should be given to all those who wish to apply." 28. The Ganguli Committee in its report suggested for constitution of Admission Committee under the chairmanship of the Principal of the school. The committee also recommended that the representatives of the parents who are in the school managing committee should be included in this committee. The functions of the admission committee were also enumerated namely : (one) overall monitoring of the admission process; (two) conducting draw of lots wherever it is required, in a transparent manner in front of parents and all members of the admission committee; (three) ensuring that the norms and criterion specific for the admission are objectively applied to determine the admission: (four) ensuring that the time schedule and other stipulations in the admission procedure are objectively adhered to and (five) attending to complaints, if any in an impartial manner and taking remedial/corrective measures. 29. The State Committee instead suggested that the nominee of the District Education Officer (primary education) not below the rank of Principal, Senior Secondary School must supervise the admission process and if any admission is found illegal or in breach of the Rules, the said nominee must report to the District Education Officer, Primary Education. The District Education Officer (Primary Education) shall then hold enquiry and submit the report to Commissioner (Primary Education). The District Education Officer (Primary Education) shall then hold enquiry and submit the report to Commissioner (Primary Education). The Commissioner (Primary Education) after affording an opportunity of hearing to the institution take decision in the matter and if he is of the opinion that the admission process deserves to be cancelled, shall order accordingly and direct for admission process to be completed through lottery system. The composition of the Admission Committee, according to the State Committee should be of four persons headed by the Head Master of the institution and three parents as its members. 30. Mr. N.K. Maloo, the counsel for the respondent No. 7 objected to these recommendations. He would submit that it was not clear as to whose parents are to be made members of the Committee-the parents of the applicants or the parents of the existing students. 31. In our considered view the composition of the Committee is not 45 very important. What is important is to bring in complete transparency in the admission process of pre-primary classes in the unaided private institutions. The mechanism should be such that obviates arbitrariness, favouratism and the extraneous considerations. Instead of having the parents on the Committee, we are of the view that the Admission Committee must comprise of the Head Master of the Institution and the two educationists of the area,one nominated by the Institution and the other by Director of Elementary Education. Wherever any complaint is received with regard to the admission process either from the parents of the children seeking admission or from any other source, the District Education Officer (Primary Education) shall be empowered to look into such complaint or hold an enquiry and submit his report to the Director, Elementary Education, Government of Rajasthan who on consideration of such report and after hearing the concerned institution shall pass appropriate order/direction which shall be complied with by such Institution. 32. That there must be time schedule for admission admits of no debate. To avoid any unhealthy competition or practice amongst various private unaided institutions, it shall be in the interest of all concerned if there is a uniform time schedule for admission to pre-primary classes. Ganguli Committee in paragraph 5.5 of its report dealt with this aspect. 33. 32. That there must be time schedule for admission admits of no debate. To avoid any unhealthy competition or practice amongst various private unaided institutions, it shall be in the interest of all concerned if there is a uniform time schedule for admission to pre-primary classes. Ganguli Committee in paragraph 5.5 of its report dealt with this aspect. 33. Paragraph 5.5 of the Ganguli report reads thus: "5.5 Time Schedule for Admission There is a tendency among schools to start the registration process as early as possible to gain a head start over other schools in the area. This practice is unhealthy. Hence the committee recommends that there should a uniform time schedule for nursery admission. The admission process shall be time bound and all private schools of Delhi should abide by it. The committee expects that the entire process of admission beginning with the issue of registration forms upto payment of fees and completing the admission formalities should be done within a period of three to four months. It is recommend that the admission process may commence on 1st December. A suggested time schedule is given below : Issue and submission of Registration Forms 1st to 20th December Screening of Forms 21st December to 25th January Display of the entire list of registered candidates with the cut-off point as we las the list of candidates short-listed for admission and candidates in the waiting list 31st January Payment of fees and completing Admission Formalities 1st February to 20th February Second List (if any) 26 February Withdrawal of admission, refund of fees and operating waiting list wherever all the seats have not been filled Upto 28th/29th February (This date can remain flexible and can be extended upto 15th March) Opening of the school 1st April 34. The State Committee has expressed its agreement with the time schedule suggested by the Ganguli Committee. As a matter of fact there was no serious opposition before us from any of the parents to the said time schedule. If the schools having pre-primary classes/nursery classes commence their session from the 1st April of the academic year, the process must start about four months before the commencement of the session. In this backdrop time schedule suggested by the Ganguli Committee and concurred by the State Committee needs to be accepted and we order accordingly. If the schools having pre-primary classes/nursery classes commence their session from the 1st April of the academic year, the process must start about four months before the commencement of the session. In this backdrop time schedule suggested by the Ganguli Committee and concurred by the State Committee needs to be accepted and we order accordingly. All the private unaided schools having pre-primary classes for the academic year beginning from 1st April, 2008 shall adhere to the aforesaid time schedule and the admission process must commence by issuance and submission of registration forms from 1st December, 2007 and for the subsequent academic sessions in the same manner. 35. The written test and the interview of the children and the interaction with the parents having been done away with, there has to be some method to assess the applicants because the number of applicants may out number the available seats in nursery classes. The Ganguli Committee suggested that the school must assess the applicants on a scale of 1 to 100 in the manner suggested in paragraph 5.6 of the report which reads thus: "5.6 Admission Process The school would asses the applicants on a scale of 1 to 100 in the following manner: (a) Under the neighbourhood head, an applicant staying within a radius of 3 kms will get the maximum of 20 points. Less weightage has been proportionately assigned to those living farther off, upto the distance of 10 km. From the school and no weightage be given for those living beyond that distance. (b) A sibling will get 20 points. (c) Under alumni category, if the father or mother is an alumni, 5 points each will be given and if both are alumni, 10 points will be given. (d) Any child who is physically disabled for any child with special needs will get 5 points. (e) Under educational qualification, a maximum of 20 points will be awarded depending on the parents' level of qualification. In the case of single parent weightage given for educational qualification will be doubled. (f) A girl child will get 5 points. (g) Under school specific parameters which the school will decide, 20 points will be given. The weightage under school specific parameters should, in no case, be used for any sort of interview or interactive session with parents/children. In the case of single parent weightage given for educational qualification will be doubled. (f) A girl child will get 5 points. (g) Under school specific parameters which the school will decide, 20 points will be given. The weightage under school specific parameters should, in no case, be used for any sort of interview or interactive session with parents/children. Thus fully taking into consideration the several weightage points that deserved inclusion, the committee is recommending the following specific matrix for calculation of weightage points: SI.No. Criteria Specifications Range of Points (Put a tick (√) Mark the appro. Place) (For the parents) Mother 1. Neighbourhood 0-3 Km 20 Above 3 and below 5 km 16 Above 5 and below 8 km 12 Above 8 and below 10 km 08 Above 10 km No weightage 2. Sibling 20 3. Alumni Father 05 Mother 05 4. Any child with special needs Child with special needs who can be mainstreamed under inclusive education 05 Mother 10 Father 10 5. Educational qualifications Post graduation which includes professional qualifications Graduation 08 08 Sr. Secondary 06 06 Class X 04 04 6. Girl Child 05 7. Any other Parameters which the school may like to fix as per their needs/ requirements 20 SUGGESTED CRITERIA AND SCALE Total Points: Before moving further, it was felt that an actual application, in field condition, would give more credibility to the proposed recommendations. So, from the list of applicants to one of the unaided private schools of Delhi, a random sample of thousand applications for 2005-06 academic year were taken out and the proposed matrix was applied to make the selection of students. The Committee came up with the detailed results for 100 available seats in the school, the details of which are given in Annexure-3. On the basis of the total number of seats available, the school would demote the cut off point by preparing the list of all registered children in a descending order of points secured and display the entire list. The admission would be done purely on the basis of the merit list prepared by the above predetermined points. In doing so, there is a possibility that in some schools there may be more children than the seats still remaining at the last stage/last cut off point. The admission would be done purely on the basis of the merit list prepared by the above predetermined points. In doing so, there is a possibility that in some schools there may be more children than the seats still remaining at the last stage/last cut off point. In order to decide the admission at this stage, a draw of lots on a limited scale has to be conducted in the presence of the admission committee and the parents. As the lottery would be between a small number of students and as it would be for children having the same weightage point, there would be both fairness and justice. The date, time and place for the draw of lots should be put up on the notice Board and the school's website for the information of parents. In order to decide the points to be given under neighbourhood concept, every school should identify clearly demarcated areas in the school's neighbourhood and indicate them in the Registration Form according to the distance specifications with weightage points for each distance zone. An example is given below : 0-3 km Above 3 km upto 5 Km Abovo 5 km upto 8 km Above 8 km upto 10 km XYZ colony, KYZ Nagar-20 points SDS Enclave, RTL Colony-16 points ABC Nagar, EFG Road-12 points JKL Colony, MNO Vihar-08 points 36. The State Committee has concurred with the aforesaid criterion to assess the applicants on a scale of 1 to 100. 37. The aforesaid criterion has been criticised by Mr. N.K. Maloo on diverse grounds. By giving an example of Jaipur City, he would submit that in the walled city there are no good schools providing for pre-primary classes. According to him in the Jaipur City, good institutions are localised in the places like Malviya Nagar, Mansarovar and C-scheme. Few good schools are at distance from the city and, therefore, the points fixed for neighbourhood are not justified and that would deprive the bonafide students. from getting admission in the institution of their choice. He also criticized the points fixed for sibling/s and the educational qualifications of the parents. There may be some merit in the objections of Mr. N.K. Maloo in this regard. The points fixed under various heads like neighbourhood, sibling, alumni, educational qualification of the parents etc. from getting admission in the institution of their choice. He also criticized the points fixed for sibling/s and the educational qualifications of the parents. There may be some merit in the objections of Mr. N.K. Maloo in this regard. The points fixed under various heads like neighbourhood, sibling, alumni, educational qualification of the parents etc. may not be absolutely proper and relevant but for want of any better criterion suggested by any of the parties and the State Committee, we are of the view that until some better criterion for assessing the applicants is suggested and examined, for the assessment of the applicants, the criterion suggested by the Ganguli committee and accepted to by the State Committee may be accepted. At least the criterion suggested by Ganguli committee for assessment of the applicants being uniformly applicable to all the institutions would obviate arbitrariness, favouratism and nepotism. We, thus, find that the recommendations of the Ganguli committee report contained in paragraph 5.6 and accepted to by the State Committee must be applied for assessment of the applicants and the said admission process must be followed from the academic session 2008. This is subject to modification as and when some more objective criterion is suggested. 38. A standardised registration form has been recommended by the Ganguli Committee in paragraph 5.3 of its report. 39. The State Committee suggested registration form for admission annexed as Annexure-1 with their report. Having thoughtfully considered the registration form for admission suggested by the State Committee, we are of the view that the same may be accepted. We, accordingly, direct that the unaided private institutions having pre- primary classes/nursery classes shall adopt the registration form (Annexure-1) annexed with the report of the State Committee. 40. As regards payment of fee and refund, the Ganguli Committee in paragraph 5.8 of its report made the following suggestions: "5.8 Special Category Schools There are schools that are catering mainly to the educational needs of the children of armed forces and paramilitary forces. Such schools will follow the policy norms criteria laid down for admission of the children of the personnel whom they are serving now. For the remaining general category, they will follow the above-mentioned point system. For minority schools established under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, the freedom to administer and admit children remains safeguarded." 41. The State Committee has accepted the said recommendation. For the remaining general category, they will follow the above-mentioned point system. For minority schools established under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, the freedom to administer and admit children remains safeguarded." 41. The State Committee has accepted the said recommendation. In our considered view the recommendation of Ganguli Committee report and agreed to by the State Committee is fair enough to be accepted. That would relieve the parents from unnecessary financial burden whose children do not get admission on valid grounds. 42. The 10% of total seats available in the private unaided educational institutions for pre-primary admission has been left to be filled to the discretion of the management of the institutions by the Ganguli Committee as well as the State Committee. We find no justifiable reason not to accept the said recommendation. The recommendation made by the State Committee that the children of the staff must be admitted in this quota or by creation of supernumerary seats deserves to be accepted and we accept the same. 43. The State Committee has suggested that pre primary course must be one year and that for the purpose of admission as on 1st April, the minimum age of the child must be four plus. 44. Mr. N.K. Maloo, the counsel for the Association (respondent No. 7) submitted that looking to the syllabus prescribed for standard I, the course of one year in pre- primary classes shall be inadequate. According to him the minimum course of pre-primary classes must be of two years and the minimum age must be three plus as on 1st April. 45. The extract of education for all global monitoring report, 2007 was placed for our consideration. A perusal thereof shows that early childhood care and education programmes aim at two age groups children under three and those from age three to primary school entry usually by age six. 46. Looking to the present educational scenario and the educational settings for children, we are of the considered view that there would not be any detriment to the growth of an infant child if the early childhood education begins at the age of three plus. That will be in tune with the global standards and the guidelines for early childhood and care. Such early education at the age of three plus shall not be physically and psychologically unsafe for a child. That will be in tune with the global standards and the guidelines for early childhood and care. Such early education at the age of three plus shall not be physically and psychologically unsafe for a child. We, thus, find it difficult to accept the recommendation of the State Committee that the pre- primary course must be of one year and the minimum age of the child on 1st April must be four plus. We, thus, observe that the pre-primary education may be of two years and the minimum age of the child as on 1st April must be three plus. 47. The recommendations given by the State Committee in Chapter 6 insofar as paragraphs 1, 4 and 9 are concerned they are accepted. The said recommendations are: HINDI MATTER 48. We summarise our directions thus: (i)That the private unaided institutions having pre-primary classes/nursery classes shall do away with written test and interview of/interaction with children and parents and that there shall not be any observation of the child either in formal or informal conditions to decide their admission. (ii) That paragraph 5.2 of the Ganguli Committee report and accepted by the State Committee relating to pre-admission procedure as set out in paragraph 27 of our order shall be strictly adhered to by private unaided schools providing for pre-primary/nursery classes. (iii) That the admission committee shall comprise of a Head Master of the concerned institution and the two educationists of the area, one nominated by the institution and the other by the Director of Elementary Education, Rajasthan. (iv) That the admission process must start at- least four months before the commencement of the session. The time schedule given in paragraph 5.5 of the Ganguli Committee report and accepted to by the State Committee as set out in paragraph 32 of this order shall be kept. (v) That the unaided private institution having pre-primary classes/nursery classes shall adopt the registration form (Annexure-1 annexed with the report of the State Committee). (vi) The recommendations of the Ganguli Committee and agreed to by the State Committee with regard to payment of fee and refund as set out in paragraph 39 of Qur order shall be followed. (vii) That the 10% of total seats available in private unaided educational institutions for pre-primary admission shall be left to be filled at the discretion of the management of the institution. (vii) That the 10% of total seats available in private unaided educational institutions for pre-primary admission shall be left to be filled at the discretion of the management of the institution. The children of the staff may be admitted in this quota or by creation of supernumerary seats. (viii) The pre-primary education may be of two years and the minimum age of the child as on 1st April must be three plus. 49. The aforesaid directions/order shall be effective for the academic session of the pre-primary classes from the 1st April, 2008 and the commencement of the admission process from 1st December, 2007. 50. The copy of this order shall be circulated by the Director of Elementary Education, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur within one month from today to all private unaided schools/institutions having pre-primary classes in the State of Rajasthan. 51. Non compliance of the aforesaid directions by any of the unaided private institution having pre-primary classes shall be treated as deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court and the defaulting institution may expose itself to the contempt of the order of this Court. 52. For consideration of the matter concerning admission in class-Ist (standard-Ist) in the private unaided schools/institutions, the matter is directed to be posted on 29th October, 2007. *******