Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 74 (UTT)

Dhruv Chaudhary v. Union of India

2017-01-30

U.C.DHYANI

body2017
JUDGMENT : U.C. Dhyani, J. Heard. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:- (I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 29.11.2016 issued by respondent no. 3 as well as the stigmatic observation made in the said order, annexed as Annexure no. 1 to the writ petition. (II) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to take a decision in writing after providing an opportunity to the communication the parents of the petitioner dated 22.01.2017. (III) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to duress or exercise any atrocities on the petitioner during his stay as a student in the school run by respondent nos. 2 and 3. 3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to Annexure No. 1 which reads as follows:- “First mail received from school on 29th Nov 2016 Dear Mr. Chaudhary This is to inform you that your son Dhruv Chaudhary has been continuously causing disruption to the school routine and despite every effort by the teachers has shown no improvement in his behaviour and conduct. Dhruv’s attitude towards the school rules and other students is having a serious detrimental effect on the atmosphere in the school. Consequently, his name is being removed from the rolls of the school and his transfer certificate will be sent to you in due course. Yours sincerely, L TINDALE PRINCIPAL” 4. Learned Senior Counsel, thereafter, submitted that Principal showed his willingness to change his decision and let the petitioner to continue in the school provided his parents meet him and discuss the matter. The said intention of the Principal is reflected in Annexure No. 5 which reads follows:- “Our legal notice dated 11th Dec 2016 Revert on legal notice on 12th Dec 2016 Dear Ms Sarin This is with reference to your e-mail dated 11 December 2016. The school is closed for winter break and the Principal has left for his vacation. We were expecting a response from Mr. Chaudhary as the Principal had requested him to come and meet him at any convenient time during the previous week. The principal is prepared to change his decision and let Dhruv continue in school provided his parents meet him and discuss the matter. We were expecting a response from Mr. Chaudhary as the Principal had requested him to come and meet him at any convenient time during the previous week. The principal is prepared to change his decision and let Dhruv continue in school provided his parents meet him and discuss the matter. The Principal will be back on 15 January and Dhruv’s parents may fix an appointment (through e-mail) to meet him. Yours sincerely Rita Young Principal’s Secretary” 5. Learned Senior Counsel, thereafter, submitted that the petitioner alongwith his parents met respondent no. 3 on 16th January 2017, but to no avail. 6. When the petitioner was left with no option, he served the respondent school with a legal notice, which was replied by the respondents as below:- “Revert from school on 23rd Jan Dear Mr. Chaudhary, This is with reference to your email dated 22 January 2017. Since you are insisting or reiterating your legal notice, I have forwarded the same to the School’s lawyer who will respond to the same. With Kind regards, L Tindale Principal” 7. Learned Senior Counsel relies upon Section 16 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred as the “Act 2009”) which speaks about prohibition of holding back and expulsion. It says “no child admitted in a school shall be held back in any class or expelled from school till the completion of elementary education”. 8. School has been defined in Section 2(n) of the Act 2009 as below:- “School” means any recognized school imparting elementary education and includes- (i) a school established, owned or controlled by the appropriate Government or a local authority; (ii) an aided school receiving aid or grants to meet whole or part of its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority; (iii) a school belonging to specified category; and (iv) an unaided school not receiving any kind of aid or grants to meet its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority”. 9. It is, therefore, the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that since the respondent’s school is an unaided school, not receiving any kind of aid or grant to meet the expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority, therefore, as per Section 16 of the Act 2009, there is a prohibition of holding back and expulsion. 10. 9. It is, therefore, the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that since the respondent’s school is an unaided school, not receiving any kind of aid or grant to meet the expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority, therefore, as per Section 16 of the Act 2009, there is a prohibition of holding back and expulsion. 10. The Court, after hearing the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself as follows:- (i) The petitioner shall make a representation before respondent no. 3 within a week. Such representation shall be decided by respondent no. 3, after hearing petitioner and his parents within next two weeks by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. (ii) It is provided that the effect and operation of Annexure No. 1 shall be kept in abeyance till the representation of the petitioner is decided in accordance with law. Urgency application also stands disposed of.