'Schools don't need Govt nod on nursery admission criteria'

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday granted greater autonomy to private schools in the capital on nursery admissions by staying a provision that required schools to get their admission criteria approved from the Delhi Government.
   
The court also widened the scope for schools to interact with parents by lifting curbs that limited their informal interaction to verification of documents.
    
Offering a slew of concessions to schools, the bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan stayed a government guideline that required schools to seek approval from the Directorate of Education (DoE), Delhi Government, on the criteria for admission to nursery.
   
It also said the individual schools could have their separate time schedule for starting the admission process but would have to complete the process by March 15, as per the Delhi Government guidelines.
   
The schools will have to inform the Directorate of Education about the admission schedule within a week and post the admission time-table on their websites.

The apex court said it was modifying a guideline, issued by the state government, that limited an interview panel's interaction with parents to verification of the veracity documents. This, in a way, would allow schools to widen the scope

However, the court refused to stay the government decision to fix four years as the minimum age for admission to pre-nursery and nursery. This was done to bring parity with government schools in which children are admitted to class I at the age of five years.
   
The Court issued a notice to Delhi Government and an NGO, Social Jurist, on whose petitions the Delhi High Court had disposed the matter after some of the guidelines formulated by the committee headed by CBSE Chairman Ashok Ganguly were accepted.
   
The Forum for Promotion of Quality Education for All and Action Committee of Unaided Private Schools have challenged the High Court order in which it said the schools should follow the guidelines incorporating some of the recommendations of the Ganguly report.
   
During the hearing, the court made some sharp observations when senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for private schools, attacked the clause restricting the interaction of parents with school management to verification of the veracity of documents.
   
"What do you (schools) want to verify. Black or white. Tall or short. Rich or poor," the Bench, also comprising Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal, said.

When Salve said it was not so and the concept of interaction has been prevalent world-wide, the Bench observed "apparently it is for collection of donation, officially or unofficially, in the name of transparency."

"While the High Court says interaction for verifying the documents, you (schools) want to know how much they (parent) can pay," it said asking "whether you want to run a school or you want your type of children".

However, Salve said informal interaction cannot be limited to verifying documents and there cannot be any restriction.
   
When it was pointed out that children have been kept away from the interview before admission, the Bench said "what will a four-year-old child speak".
   
"Does the Act by Parliament say that child should be interviewed before admission," the Bench posed the question to Salve, who shot back saying "it does not prohibit also".
   
The Bench said "instead of helping the students you are making the parents run (around) like beggars".
   
At this, Salve said where will be then the autonomy of the private schools if the government will run them.
   
He also opposed the guidelines based on the Ganguly report which require schools to priority to children living in its neighbourhood and start the admission procedure from November 30.
   
"Why I am being forced to (implement the) neighbourhood criteria," Salve said.
   
However, the Bench said "if you are in a particular locality you have to cater to it".

"If individual schools have any objection they can come individually with their grievances before the court," it said, adding that "there is always a resistance for change."
   
Salve responded to this remark saying "resistance will be there if it is not for betterment".
   
"How can one change the character of my school by imposing neigbourhood criteria," he asked.