Prayagraj, June 16 : The Allahabad High Court has observed that receiving proper education is a fundamental right enshrined under Article 21-A of the Constitution of India.
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.
On March 25, the results were declared and Tanishk was declared successful and eligible for admission in Class 8 as a resident scholar.
However, due to his mother’s serious illness and his father being out of the state, he could not join school.
Therefore, his father moved an application on April 4, before the school management and hoped that instead of treating his son as a resident scholar, he may be given admission as a day scholar as he is ready to complete all required formalities, including the fees.
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.
Challenging the writ petition, the father of the candidate moved an instant appeal before the division bench.
The court upheld the order of the single judge who had dismissed the writ plea on the ground that since the institution was an unaided minority private institution, therefore, the writ petition against it may not be entertained.
However, before dismissing the appeal, the court observed that the institution should have forwarded the specific information (whether Tanishk could be admitted to the school as a resident scholar) to the parents of the student at the earliest so that appropriate steps could be taken by his parents.
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.
“Therefore, in such compelling circumstances, at least on the basis of principles of equity, it was bare minimum required on the part of the principal of the institution to apprise 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.”
The bench also opined that if the request of the student/parents of the student was not liable to be accepted by the school, this decision should have been immediately conveyed to the parents so that the student could get admission in any other institution for receiving proper education which is a fundamental right enshrined under Article 21-Aa.
