New Delhi, Jul 13, 2012, DHNS:Vidyalayas were ready to stop classes but not scrap exam
The Delhi High Court on Friday upheld the Delhi government stand of conducting admission tests for students applying in class 6 in its Rajkiya Pratibha Vikas Vidyalayas on Friday.
The bench said RPVVs admissions in class 6 can be considered as cases of transfer of students from one government school to another.
There was controversy after these much sought-after 17 government schools proposed shutting down classes six to eight rather than give up the practice of conducting tests. RPVVs argued that it was not possible to allow admissions in class 6 without testing the aspirants.
The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) and lawyer-activists had opposed admission tests and had filed a petition against that in the High Court.
They had expressed the belief that the Right to Education Act cannot be interpreted or implemented in a manner where existing classes can be closed as it would result in deprivation of education to over 3,000 children.
The court order says the department cannot shut down classes as it is illegal and will deprive several children of basic education. However, the NCPCR’s order of imposing a fine on the directorate of education has been quashed by the court.
The fine of Rs 25,000 had been imposed on the director of DoE and deputy director of education of RPVVs in 2010 by the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights for violating the RTE Act by conducting admission tests.
Due to this RTE ‘compulsion’ that children seeking admission cannot be interviewed, Delhi government decided not to take any admissions in class 6 in 2010, 2011 and even this year.
The court has now asked the department to admit children in class 6 in the current and next academic year.
However, advocates say the court ruling has opened a pandora’s box for schools to `violate’ RTE rules.
“We are in the process of getting the copy of the judgement as the main hurdle of the interpretation of screening children for admissions is still not clear.
We will file an appeal or review in court to get the exact definition of screening,” said advocate Khagesh Jha.