Not Allowing Student To Take Board Exams On Ground Of Non Payment Of Fees Violative Of Article 21: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that barring a student from taking examinations on the ground of non-payment of fees would be infringement of rights of a child as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Justice Mini Pushkarna observed that a child’s future cannot be allowed to be spoiled and blemished by barring him or her from taking examinations, especially at a crucial juncture of class X and XII examinations.

“Thus, a child cannot be made to suffer and not be allowed to attend classes or barred from taking examinations in the middle of an academic session on the ground of non-payment of fees. Education is the foundation, which shapes the future of a child and which in turn shapes the future of the society in general,” the court said.

It added: "Therefore, not allowing a student to take examinations, especially the Board Examinations, would be infringement of the rights of a child akin to Right to Life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Supreme Court has expanded the rights under Article 21 of Constitution of  India and education is certainly one of the important rights which would be encompassed under right to life. In furtherance of the same, Article 21A of the Constitution of India provides for Right to Education, wherein the State has been ordained to provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of 6 to 14 years."

The court also observed that in the context of Indian Society, Class 10th and Class 12th Board Examinations are vitally important and critical, having decisive repercussions and bearing on the future of a student. 

However, the court also said that a private unaided school cannot be forced to continue with a child who is unable to pay fees, having taken admission in the general quota and not under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) or Disadvantaged Group (DG) quota.

“Therefore, the rights of a child to education has to be balanced with the rights of the school under the DSER, 1973. The constitutionality and validity of Rule 35 of Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, which authorises the Head of the school to strike off the name of a student from the rolls of the school on account of non-payment of fees, has not been struck down by any Court of law,” the court said.

Taking a “compassionate and sympathetic view”, Justice Pushkarna permitted a class X student to take the board examination after his name was struck off due to non-payment of fees by The Indian School.

Stating that the petitioner child does not have a right to continue education in the school if he is unable to pay the fees, the court, however, said the minor cannot be tormented in the middle of an academic session.

The plea was listed on January 17 upon urgent mentioning since the practical exams for class X board examination were scheduled from January 18.

While granting relief to the petitioner, the court deprecated the parent's conduct in approaching the court at the eleventh hour, when the practical board examinations were to commence after one day.

“However, it is noted that the petitioner has approached this Court at a belated stage despite the fact that name of the petitioner had been struck off by the school firstly by way of letter dated 07.09.2022 and subsequently, by way of letter dated 19.11.2022,” the court said.

The court directed the school to issue the CBSE Roll Number to the petitioner to enable him to take up the Board Examinations. The school was also directed to allow the child to attend any classes or special classes that may be held for imparting education to the children for class X board examinations.

However, in order to balance the equities, the court considered it imperative to direct the petitioner child to pay some amount towards the fees payable to the school.

“In the facts and circumstances of the case, since it has been expressed on behalf of the father of the petitioner that the family is undergoing financial constraints, it is directed that the petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- to the school within a period of four weeks from today on account of the dues payable to the school towards the fees,” the court directed.

Advocates Malka Asad and Sonal Singh represented the petitioner.  The petition was filed through advocate Hardik Rupal.

Title: PSV v. THE INDIAN SCHOOL & ANR

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 61

Click Here To Read/Download Judgement