Vaibhav Vyankatrao Kamble and Others v. the State of Maha., Thr. the Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Apr 2024PIL/17/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL challenging an amendment adding a proviso to Rule 4(5) of the Maharashtra RTE Rules, 2011, barring local authorities from identifying private unaided schools for 25% disadvantaged-section admissions where government or aided schools exist within one kilometre. Court found arguable substance in light of the statutory definition of 'School' and issued notice.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vaibhav Vyankatrao Kamble and Others vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

921PIL17.24.odt 1/3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

¶3

P.I.L. NO.17 OF 2024

¶4

(Mr. Vaibhav Vyankatrao Kamble and others .vs The State of Maharashtra and others)

¶5

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,__________________________________________________________________________ appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶6

Ms. Jayna Kothari, Senior Advocate a/b Mr. Deepak Chatap, Advocate Mr. R.S. Bhoyar, Advocate and Ms. Payal Gaikwad, Advocate for the petitioners,

¶7

Ms. T.H. Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 3.

¶8

C ORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. D ATE : 24.04.2024.

¶9

Heard.

¶10

The challenge is to the legality of the amended rule wherein proviso is added after Sub-Rule (5) to Rule 4 of the Maharashtra Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011 wherein the rider is provided to the local authorities not to identify the private unaided school, for the purposes of 25 per cent admission of disadvantaged group and weaker section under the Maharashtra Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (Manner of admission of Minimum 25% children in Class I or Pre-school at the entry level for the children belonging to disadvantaged group and weaker section) Rules, 2013, where the Government Schools and aided schools are situated within the radius of one kilometer of that school.

¶11

921PIL17.24.odt 2/3

¶12

According to counsel for the petitioner, the term ‘ School ’ is defined under clause (n) of Section 2 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which includes under its sub-clause (iv), an unaided school not receiving any kind of aid or grants to meet its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority.

¶13

According to counsel for the petitioner, unless the unaided school are taken out of ambit of definition of School as defined under Clause (n) of Section 2 sub-clause (iv) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the proviso to Rule (4) ought not to given effect to as the proviso runs contrary to the very definition of word ‘School’ and also the proviso to Rule 4 which is sought to be incorporated vide amendment dated 9^th of February, 2024, commits violative to the very object of the principal statute i.e. the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

¶14

There appears to be substance in the submissions particularly having regard to the definition of School provided under clause (n) of Section 2 of the Parent Act.

¶15

Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 08^th May, 2024.

¶16

Ms. T.H. Khan, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice for respondent nos.1 to 3.

¶17

921PIL17.24.odt 3/3

¶18

Since the counsel for the petitioner has insisted for grant of interim relief, we make it clear that the respondents must file their reply by 7^th May, 2024 as this court intend to take up the matter on 8^th May, 2024 for the consideration of grant of interim relief.

¶19

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶20

Gulande

¶21

Signed by: A.S. GULANDE Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 25/04/2024 17:24:00

Vaibhav Vyankatrao Kamble and Others v. the State of Maha., Thr. the Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vaibhav Vyankatrao Kamble and Others v. the State of Maha., Thr. the Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nilesh Chandrakant Kamble Vs Mmrda Govt of Maharashtra

Anuj Krishnakumar Mittal vs State of Maharashtra

Medico Legal Society of India Thr. Its Founder Member Rajeev D. Joshi vs the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Anr.

Ashish Dnyandeo Mane vs Pune Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Commissioner and Ors.

Ajit Ramchandra Patil and Anr. vs the National Highway Authority and Ors.

Animal Rescue Trust through Vineeta Tandon vs Union of India ( Thr Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying) and Ors.

Mahadev Baburao Pednekar and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary Public Works Department Kolhapur and Ors.

Sushant Sanjay Patil and Ors. vs the Union of India Thr. Secretary and Ors.

Area General Manager, Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur Area vs Dattu S/O Sadashiv Raut (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Dhaniram S/O Dattuji Raut and Others

Sau. Gokarna Vasanta Munje vs the Executive Engineer, Lower Canal Division, (Laghu Patbandhare Vibhag), Washim and Others

National Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office, Nagpur Thr. Its Regional Manager, Nagpur vs Smt. Shyamkala Wd/O Rajesh Partaki and Others

Dr. Smt. Sushmit W/O Shishir Shrivastava and Anor. Vs Sadashiv S/O Marotrao Ghormade

Doma S. Dongre (Dead) through Lrs. Gayabai Wd/O Doma Dongre (Dead)Thr. Lrs. Maroti D. Dongre and or vs Nilkanth S/O Raghobaji Dongre (Dead) Thr. Lrs. Smt Gangabai Wd/O Nilkanth Dongre and Others

Gangaram S/O Kapurchand Damahe vs Fulwantabai Wd/O Antu Damahe (Dead) and Others