ORDER : S. Abdul Nazeer, J. The petitioner was studying in 8th standard at National Academy of Learning, Basaveshwaranagar, Bangalore, during the academic year 2011 -12. He was admitted to first standard in the said institution for the academic year 2004-2005. It appears that he was involved in an incident in which he is reported to have ascribed certain Words without understanding its seriousness, on account of which he Was orally instructed not to attend the classes of 8th standard. Therefore, he has filed this writ petition for a mandamus directing the third respondent to permit him to continue his studies in 8th standard for the academic year 2011-2012 and also to permit him to appear for the examination. 2. This Court by an Order dated 9.3.2012 directed respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to permit the petitioner to appear for the 8th standard examination commencing on 12.3.2012. However, they were directed not to announce the result of the said examination. Accordingly, petitioner has appeared for the said examination. 3. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have filed their statement of objections contending that when the petitioner was studying in 8th standard, he was involved in unpardonable activities. The institution took a lenient view and directed the petitioner not to attend the classes from February, 2012. His parents were advised to prepare the petitioner for the examination of the 8th class, which was to commence on 12.3.2012. The petitioner was advised to seek admission in the nearby school from the next academic year. However, he has rushed to this Court without any reason. He was allowed to appear for the examination. 4. The petitioner has filed an application-1.A. No. 1/2012 enclosing a copy of the letter at Annexure ‘K’ dated 2.8.2012 whereby the second respondent has informed the father of the petitioner that petitioner will not continue as a student at the second respondent-Institution with effect from the end of July, 2012. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have filed their objections to the said application. 5. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner is a brilliant student. He is aged about 13 years. Even if he was involved in certain incident in which he ought not to have taken part, having regard to his tender age, the school authorities should have advised him suitably. 5. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner is a brilliant student. He is aged about 13 years. Even if he was involved in certain incident in which he ought not to have taken part, having regard to his tender age, the school authorities should have advised him suitably. In this regard, the father of the petitioner has sent a letter at Annexure ‘G’ dated 23.2.2012 tendering an unconditional apology on behalf of his son. Stopping him from attending the classes is not a solution to the problem. The punitive action slapped on the child has created a telling effect on him psychologically as well as physiologically. He has become down cast from the day and appears to be depressive and lost all enthusiasm for studies. The abrupt leaving of the school lingers in his mind with uncertainty of his future looms large. Therefore, he should be permitted to attend the classes. He further submits that having regard to Section 16 of the Right of Child to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the child cannot be held back in any class or expelled from school till the completion of elementary education i.e. from first standard to 8th standard. He has been attending the classes of 9th standard. Therefore, petitioner may be permitted to continue his studies in the second respondent-Institution. 7. On the other hand, Learned Counsel appearing for the second and third respondents submits that the second respondent-Institution is one of the best institutions in Bangalore. The goodwill is earned over a period of time for giving quality education institution believes in maintaining absolute discipline. There is no ill will or prejudice against the petitioner. When the petitioner was studying in 8th standard, he was involved in activities, which was unpardonable. He should have been debarred from the school for indulging in the said activities. But the institution has taken a lenient view and directed the petitioner not to attend classes from February 2012. By then, the teaching for the academic year 2011-2012 was concluded. Therefore, there was no cause for the petitioner to approach this Court. It is further argued that the petitioner is not admitted to 9th standard. However, he has been attending the classes of 9th standard. He has not changed his attitude even now. By then, the teaching for the academic year 2011-2012 was concluded. Therefore, there was no cause for the petitioner to approach this Court. It is further argued that the petitioner is not admitted to 9th standard. However, he has been attending the classes of 9th standard. He has not changed his attitude even now. That is why the institution has sent a letter as per Annexure ‘K’ dated 2.8.2012 informing the father of the petitioner that the petitioner will not continue as a student at the second respondent-Institution. 8. I have carefully considered the arguments of the Learned Counsel made at the Bar and perused the materials placed on record. 9. It is clear from the materials on record that the petitioner has indulged in certain activities in which he should not have involved while he was studying in 8th standard. That is why the third respondent has asked him not to attend the classes. The institution had not prevented him from appearing for the 8th standard examination. The father of the petitioner has sent a letter as per Annexure ‘G’ to the second respondent-Institution tendering unconditional apology on behalf of the petitioner and requesting them to permit the petitioner to continue his studies. 10. The petitioner was aged 13 years when the incident took place. It is undeniable that children are the most important assets of our nation. In fact, a Nation’s future primarily depends upon what its children become when they grow up as citizens and this depends on what children’s holistic development and the kind of education or care is given to them, from their conception up-to they being grown ups. Admittedly, the petitioner has been studying in the second respondent from the academic year 2004-2005 onwards. The father of the petitioner does not deny the petitioner’s involvement in certain activities in which he should not have participated. It is obvious that he has participated in the said activities without intending or meaning any harm to anyone. If the child commits a mistake, sending him out of the institution is not the solution. The child should be counselled suitably. If a punitive action is slapped on the child, it will have a telling effect on the child psychologically as well as physiologically. It is very likely that he may become down cast and may lose enthusiasm for further studies. The child should be counselled suitably. If a punitive action is slapped on the child, it will have a telling effect on the child psychologically as well as physiologically. It is very likely that he may become down cast and may lose enthusiasm for further studies. The abrupt leaving of the school will linger in his mind with the uncertainty of his future looming large. Needless to say that relationship with peers and adults have an effect on how children think, learn and develop. Families, schools and peer groups play an important role in a child’s development. If the child is removed from the school at this juncture, it will cause more harm to the child. 11. Pursuant to the interim order of this Court, the petitioner has appeared for the 8th standard examination. Having regard to Section 16 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the second respondent cannot hold him back in 8th standard class nor can he be expelled from the school till the completion of 8th standard. The petitioner has attended the classes of 9th standard from June/July, 2012 till this day, which is not in dispute. At this stage it is very difficult for the parents of the petitioner to admit him to sortie other school. 12. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the second and third respondents have to suitably counsel the petitioner and permit him to attend the class. I am sure that this graceful act of the school authorities will bring a sea of change in the attitude of the child. The parents of the child are also required to suitably counsel the child. Since all the children are of the group of 13 to 14 years, they will adjust with the child and forget the isolated incident over a period of time and prevent the child from going astray. 13. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The communication at Annexure ‘K’ dated 2.8.2012 issued by the second respondent-Institution to the father of the petitioner is hereby quashed. (ii) I direct the second and third respondents to admit the petitioner to the 9 standard forthwith and permit him to continue the education in the school. 13. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The communication at Annexure ‘K’ dated 2.8.2012 issued by the second respondent-Institution to the father of the petitioner is hereby quashed. (ii) I direct the second and third respondents to admit the petitioner to the 9 standard forthwith and permit him to continue the education in the school. (iii) The father of the petitioner is directed to pay the requisite fee to the second respondent-Institution for pursuing the studies of the petitioner in 9th standard within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iv) Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. 14. In view of the disposal of the writ petition as above, I.A. Nos. 1/2012 and 2/2012 are also disposed of. No costs. Writ Petition is Disposed of.