Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Admission For EWS Student Beyond Academic Year, Emphasizes Adherence To RTE Act Provisions

In a recent legal ruling, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition seeking admission for a student from the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) in a private school for the academic year 2024-2025.

The petitioner, Ayesha Sankhla, had applied for admission to Nursery/Pre-School grade in the academic year 2022-2023. Notably, under the regime of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (the RTE Act), she belongs to the Disadvantaged Group (DG), who is entitled to admission to entry level classes under Section 121 of the said Act on preferential basis.

The Court clarified that if a child seeks intervention during the academic year for which the Department of Education (DoE) has already allocated seats, and the Court either orders provisional admission or reserves a spot for the child in that school, then even if the case is addressed after the academic year concludes, the Court can provide relief.

However, if the child approaches the Court after the academic year has ended, their right is no longer valid, it was held.

The Court further said that schools which have obtained land at concessional rates from public authorities are, under the land clause contained in the applicable lease deeds, required to admit EWS students to the extent of 20% of the strength of each class, beyond the entry-level class, till completion of education. 

Justice C Hari Shankar presiding over the case observed, “If the child approaches the Court during the year for which the allotment has been made by the DoE and the Court either directs provisional admission or reserves a seat in favour of the child for that year in that school, then, even if the petition is taken up after the year is over, the Court is in a position to grant relief.”

However, if the child approaches the Court after the academic year is come to an end, the right of the child no longer survives and, for any subsequent academic year, the child would have to compete with other students in accordance with the protocol devised in that regard by the DoE by submitting an application for admission as an EWS/DG student,” Justice Shankar added.

As per the allegations in the petition, the respondent-school refused to admit the petitioner despite the outcome of the computerized draw of lots conducted by the DoE. Apparently in order not to lose precious academic years, the petitioner's father admitted her to another school.

Advocate Rishabh Kapur, the counsel for the petitioner, submitted before the Court that this was done only under compulsion and that continuing the petitioner's education in the said other school would be beyond his financial means.

The prayer in the petition was for a direction to the respondent- school to admit the petitioner in Class II for the academic year 2024- 2025.

The Court citing one of its previous judgments in Jiya v. Maharaja Agrasen Model School 2024 SCC OnLine Del 2126, stated, “I have taken the view that right that enures in favour of a child belonging to a EWS or DG category, under the RTE Act, for admission to a particular school, would enure only if the child applies to the DoE for admission as an EWS or DG candidate to an entry level class in that academic year and, consequent on a computerized draw of lots conducted by the DoE, is shortlisted for admission to that school. The result of the computerized draw of lots is academic year, school and class specific.”

“While applying for admission, the child has to specify the class/grade in which the child seeks admission and the academic year for which admission is sought. The case of the child is considered randomly, by the computer, along with the cases of other children who have, for that academic year, sought admission as EWS/DG candidates for the same class. The computerized draw of lots is conducted for EWS/DG students, who are seeking admission in that academic year to the specified entry level class, as per the application submitted by the student,” it added.

The Court stated that even if the outcome of the computerized draw of lots is in favour of a particular student, the benefit of that outcome can enure in favour of the student only till the end of that academic year. Once the year comes to an end, the benefit stands extinguished.

“To my mind, this legal position is painfully obvious. In the present case, for example, the petitioner has, in his favour, the outcome of the computerized draw of lots conducted by the DoE, which shortlisted him for admission in the respondent-school in Nursery/Pre-School in 2022-2023,” the Court added.

Referring to the slip containing the result of the draw of lots, as communicated by the DoE to the petitioner, the Court observed that the petitioner was shortlisted for admission to Nursery/Pre- School in the respondent-school for 2022-2023, not for admission to Class I in 2024-2025, which is what the petitioner prayed for.

The Court opined, “If the petitioner bases his right on the outcome of the computerized draw of lots conducted by the DoE, the Court opined he has to do so as per the express terms of the outcome of the draw of lots. He cannot, therefore, base a claim to admission to Class I in 2024-2025 in the respondent-school on the basis of a computerized draw of lots conducted by the DoE which has shortlisted him for admission to Nursery/Pre-School in 2022-2023 in the respondent-school.

“Section 12 of the RTE Act enures, in favour of DG category students, only in entry level classes, and not beyond. As a private unaided school, the respondent-school falls within Section 2(n)(iv)3 of the RTE Act. Section 12(1)(c) obligates the respondent-school, therefore, to “admit in Class I, to the extent of at least twenty five percent of the strength of that class, children belonging to weaker section and disadvantaged group in the neighbourhood and provide free and compulsory elementary education till its completion,” it added.

Case Title: Ayesha Sankhla (Through Guardian Kapil Kumar Sankhala) Vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 521

Click Here To Download Judgement