By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, June 6: The parents at the centre of the recent admission dispute involving St. Edmund’s School have expressed gratitude to the school’s management and tendered an apology for any inconvenience or reputational harm caused during the controversy, stating that the matter has been resolved amicably.
In a joint statement issued on Saturday, Deepali Patel and Pushpendra Patel said the events of the past few weeks arose from circumstances that led to a misunderstanding and an avoidable dispute concerning the admission of their son.
The couple said they had been driven by anxiety and concern for their child’s future and educational prospects, but after reflection and an amicable resolution of the matter, they wished to acknowledge the manner in which the school authorities handled the situation.
They expressed appreciation to the school principal, management, faculty and staff of St. Edmund’s School for their willingness to resolve the issue in a constructive and compassionate manner and for granting their son admission to the institution.
Describing St. Edmund’s School as an institution that has built a reputation over generations for excellence in education, discipline, character formation and service to society, the parents said that they were proud that their child would now be part of the school’s student community.
The statement marks a significant development in a dispute that had attracted public attention in recent weeks after the parents approached legal forums over the admission issue.
The matter had generated widespread discussion in educational and public circles in Shillong, with questions being raised over admission procedures and the rights of educational institutions. The controversy had also led to considerable public debate and media attention.
In their statement, the parents offered what they termed a sincere and unreserved apology if any statement, action, misunderstanding, media report, public discussion or unintended consequence arising from the dispute had caused embarrassment, inconvenience or reputational damage to the school principal, management, teachers, staff or the institution.
They clarified that it had never been their intention to question the integrity, dedication or commitment of the school or its leadership and said any perception to the contrary was deeply regretted.
They further stated that they were committed to maintaining a constructive and respectful relationship with the school and would work closely with the principal, teachers and administration for the welfare and overall development of their son.
Requesting privacy for their child, the parents appealed to the media, well-wishers and members of the public to consider the issue as fully and amicably resolved.
