Right to Education is a fundamental right under Article 21A of Constitution Of India, observed the Allahabad High Court.
The bench, which included Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Subhash Vidyarthi, went on to say that educational authorities must make sure that any grievances about admission to a school are resolved quickly and that they do not go unresolved.
The bench was dealing with the case of one Tanishk Srivastava, a Class 8 student. He appeared in the entrance test held on March 20 for admission as a resident scholar in the La Martiniere College, Lucknow, in Class 8.
Tanishk was certified successful and eligible for admission to Class 8 as a resident scholar on March 25, according to the results. He was unable to enrol in school due to his mother’s terrible illness and his father’s absence from the state.
Must read: ECIL LDC Recruitment 2022 Notification
As a result, on April 4, his father filed an application with the school administration, requesting that instead of considering his son as a resident scholar, he be admitted as a day scholar because he is prepared to complete all the formalities, including the payments.
When the appellant/writ petitioner, the father of the candidate, was not informed about the fate of the admission of his son till April 18, he filed a writ petition before the court which was dismissed by a single judge.
The candidate’s father filed an instant appeal before the division bench, challenging the writ petition. The court supported the single judge’s decision to dismiss the writ case on the grounds that because the institution was an unassisted minority private institution, the writ petition against it could not be heard.
Before dismissing the appeal, the court noted that the institution should have provided the precise information (whether Tanishk might be admitted to the school as a resident scholar) to the student’s parents as soon as possible so that they may take necessary action.
The Allahabad High Court said: “This is not a case where the student has not qualified the entrance examination for getting admission in particular class but this is a case where such student has qualified such entrance examination as resident scholar but due to compelling and unavoidable circumstances, he could not get admission as a resident scholar.
“In such compelling circumstances, it was the bare minimum required on the part of the principal of the institution to notify the parents of the student that the institution would be unable to provide admission to their ward in Class 8 as a day scholar student, at least on the basis of principles of equity.”
The bench also stated that if the student’s/parents’ request was not likely to be accepted by the school, the decision should have been communicated to the parents as soon as possible so that the student could seek admission to another institution for proper education, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21-A.