Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 17 (KAR)

Jagdeep Rao v. State of Karnataka

2024-01-05

KRISHNA S.DIXIT, PRASANNA B.VARALE

body2024
ORDER : (Prasanna B. Varale, CJ.) This Complaint of Contempt alleges wilful disobedience of a learned Single Judge's interim order dated 5.12.2023 made in the complainant's pending W.P.No.27082/2023 and its operative portion has the following text: "The respondents are insisting the petitioner to pay fine failing which the respondents will not allow the daughter to attend the classes. There shall be stay the operation of Annexure-F and further, respondent No.8 - school is directed to permit the daughter of the petitioner Ms. Rituparna Rao to attend the school/classes, who is studying in IX standard at respondent No.8-school, till the next date of hearing." 2. The complainant had immediately conveyed the subject order to the school authorities by sending a slew of emails as is prima facie evidenced by Annexures-J & K to the complaint. However, there was not only no response but the ward Ms.Rituparna, a student of 9th std was not permitted to attend the classes, for several days. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant & his wife declined to give any undertaking which the school was insisting upon as a pre-condition for admitting the ward to the class in terms of court order. We find force in this submission since that version remains uncontroverted in the subject affidavit. A bald statement at para 2 of the affidavit that the Court order dated 05.12.2023 in W.P No.27082/2023 has been fully complied with is only partially true. Speaking on the verge of truth is a sin. 3. This matter was heard at length on 3.2.2023 and learned Senior Advocate one Mr. S.Basavaraj had represented the respondent-school. On his request, matter was adjourned to this day since he desired to file the affidavit/objections. Today "Compliance Affidavit" sworn to by the Principal - Mr. George Kutti Joseph has been filed in the open court after serving a copy thereof on the counsel representing the complainant. 4. Having perused the affidavit in the light of pleadings, we apprised the learned Sr. Advocate Smt. Jayna Kothari now appearing for the School as to what had transpired a day before in the Court, when Mr. S.Basavaraj, learned Sr. Counsel had made certain submissions. We specifically mentioned to her that Mr. 4. Having perused the affidavit in the light of pleadings, we apprised the learned Sr. Advocate Smt. Jayna Kothari now appearing for the School as to what had transpired a day before in the Court, when Mr. S.Basavaraj, learned Sr. Counsel had made certain submissions. We specifically mentioned to her that Mr. Basavaraj had stated about the School intending to offer an unconditional apology, then not insisting upon any undertaking from the side of parents, then not forcing the parents/wards dissociating from Whatsapp Groups and lastly, of taking compensatory classes to 50 plus students who were not allowed to attend classes for no fault attributable to them. Mrs. Jayana Kothari appearing for the said school drew our attention again to the contents of the affidavit and submitted that the order in question has been duly complied with. We are not inclined to accept this version. 5. The reasons for not accepting the assertion made on behalf of the Respondent - School are not far to seek: The interim order granted by the learned Single Judge in the pending writ petition on 05.12.2023 keeping in view the difficulty of students who are kept away from classes. The order specifically injuncted the School to permit Complainant's ward to attend the classes forthwith. It was not a thing to be done leisurely at the whimsical will of the School authorities, attending classes being as important as can be, for any student. Para 3 of the affidavit again speaks only a half truth in saying that the School had received copy of the Court order only on 14.12.2023 when they were informed of the order by a series of emails. Copies of these emails are produced by the Complainant as Annexures J & K; significantly, they are not disputed by the School in the affidavit or at the Bar. In the academically competitive days like these, the parents in general and mothers in particular, undergo a lot of tension, agony & anxiety when their wards are kept away from the classroom. Agony happens even to the students, needs no substantiation. No plausible explanation is offered for not obeying the Court order from 05.12.2023 to 15.12.2023. 6. The School could pass the Resolution only on 14.12.2023, is a very poor justification for the disobedience of Court order of the kind, when academic fate of not one single student but 50 plus, was at stake. No plausible explanation is offered for not obeying the Court order from 05.12.2023 to 15.12.2023. 6. The School could pass the Resolution only on 14.12.2023, is a very poor justification for the disobedience of Court order of the kind, when academic fate of not one single student but 50 plus, was at stake. It only shows how casual, if not cruel the School authorities are in treating the young minds. Added, even the language of said Resolution is slippery. The imposition of fine on the parents and intended enquiry against the wards being the subject matter of pending petition, we are not inclined to discuss this aspect more. However, we only remind the School authorities of what Rabindranath Tagore had penned (Gitanjali - 1910): "Where the mind is without fear and head is held high; where knowledge is free ... into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake." 7. The version of the Complainant that he had again forwarded another email on 07.12.2023 informing the Principal about the subject order of the Court and that the Vice Principal was not permitting his ward to the classroom, is not controverted in the affidavit. He further had said about the Vice Principal's refusal to accept the tender of order copy as well. This happening in a so called "reputed School", is strange & bewildering. Such a conduct of the School authorities amounts to an affront to the judicial process. However, now that the ward & other students are permitted to attend the classes on regular basis since 16.12.2023 and there is an undertaking given by the counsel appearing for the School that compensatory classes would be taken for these innocent children for making good what they had lost, much deliberation is not desirable. 8. Learned Senior Advocate Mrs. Jayna Kothari draws our attention to paragraph No.7 of the affidavit which reads as under: "I submit and reiterate once again that I have the highest regards of the orders of this Hon'ble Court and if there has even inadvertently been the slightest violation of the order of this Hon'ble Court, I tender my unconditional apology." She seeks dropping of these proceedings with impunity on the basis of so called apology. The text of apology apart from being unsatisfactory, does not generate confidence in us as to the sincerity of the deponent. The text of apology apart from being unsatisfactory, does not generate confidence in us as to the sincerity of the deponent. The apology is couched in a language that thickens our such impression. In a way it is as non-committal, as we see in bureaucratic terminology. Had the deponent been a farmer, a labourer or a person hailing from rural area, such an explanation arguably would have merited lenient acceptance. However, he happens to be Head of the Institution i.e. the Principal of the School, going by his own description in the affidavit. That makes all the difference. Added, the act of causing enormous tension & anxiety to the parents and 50 plus wards with no justification, cannot go unpunished. A strong message has to be conveyed across and to all the quarters concerned that the Courts shall not tolerate "unscrupulous educational institutions" denying to the innocent students entry to their academic classes/courses. It is more so when Right to Education is part of Article 21 of the Constitution and now that, Article 21A is also superadded. In the above circumstances and with the above observations, this Complaint of Contempt is reluctantly dropped. The 8th Respondent - School shall pay an exemplary cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only to the Chief Minister's Relief Fund, Government of Karnataka, Bengaluru, and file the acknowledgement in the Registry of this Court within three weeks. The Registry to send by Speed Post a copy of this order to the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Vidhanasoudha, immediately.