- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Calcutta High Court
- /
- Calcutta High Court Dismisses PIL...
Calcutta High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Regulations Over Coaching Centres In West Bengal, Directs Party To Approach State Authorities
Srinjoy Das
16 Jan 2025 8:31 AM
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to regulate the functioning of coaching centres in West Bengal and for the imposition of guidelines framed by the government of India. The court instead directed the petitioners, who were a registered body, to first approach the state authorities seeking implementation of the guidelines, and for the state...
The Calcutta High Court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to regulate the functioning of coaching centres in West Bengal and for the imposition of guidelines framed by the government of India. The court instead directed the petitioners, who were a registered body, to first approach the state authorities seeking implementation of the guidelines, and for the state to consider the same within three months.
A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya held: "The petitioner organisation claims that its members are various teaching and non-teaching staff employed at various government and aided schools and they are concerned about the private coaching. Before approaching the court, the organisation ought to have made a representation before the appropriate authority and when the action taken was not satisfactory, it would auger well for them to approach the court. Therefore the prayer sought is immature, and the proper course for the petitioners would be to approach the state authorities."
Counsel for the petitioner claimed that the petitioner organisation was concerned about the non-regulation of private coaching centres in West Bengal, in spite of a central government directive, as well as in light of the death of students at a coaching centre in Delhi due to flooding.
It was argued that since the issue formed part of the concurrent list, the state government was shifting the onus on to the centre, which had framed preliminary guidelines, but the same had not been enforced.
Thus, a direction was sought from the court to implement the guidelines framed by the centre as well as direct the state to make regulations over private coaching centres.
Case: GOVERNMENT AIDED TEACHERS AND NONTEACHING STAFF WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND ANR. VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Case No: WPA(P)/442/2024