Central Academy International School Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

(a)Allow the Writ Petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the form of mandamus or any other writ/direction/order for setting aside the impugned order dated 02.04.2025 whereby the affiliation of the petitioner as senior secondary/ secondary school has been withdrawn; and

¶18

The case set out in the petition is that the respondent CBSE vide its

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:16:27

¶21

order dated 24.02.2025 had, inter alia , withdrawn the affiliation granted to the petitioner school upto Senior Secondary Level, with immediate effect. The operative part of the said order reads as under:

¶22

“1. The affiliation granted to the school upto Senior Secondary Level be withdrawn with immediate effect.

¶23

2. The Students in class X and XII are permitted to appear from the same school for session 2024-25.

¶24

3. However, the students who are presently in class IX shall be shifted to nearby school by Regional Officer, East Delhi by 31st March, 2025 for session 2025-26. The school shall not take any new admissions or promote the students of lower classes in IX and XI by natural progression, hereafter

¶25

4. The school may seek restoration of affiliation upto secondary level after lapse of one academic year i.e. from 2026-27 after ameliorating the deficiencies pointed out with regard to running upto secondary level.

¶26

5. The school may seek restoration of affiliation upto senior secondary level only at least after 02 academic years of restoration upto secondary level, if so sought and granted.”

¶27

The petitioner school submitted its review representation dated 10.03.2025 against the aforesaid order, which also came to be rejected vide impugned order dated 02.04.2025 observing that every aspect of the representation has been carefully considered and there is no requirement of any modification in the order dated 24.02.2025.

¶28

Ms. Akanksha Kaul, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in so far as the disaffiliation of the school for the Senior Secondary level is concerned, the petitioner is not pressing the present petition against the same, however, the concern of the petitioner is the disaffiliation of the petitioner till the secondary level (i.e. classes IX and X) in respect of which there is no allegation of dummy admissions.

¶29

She further submits that in so far as the deficiencies pointed out in the

¶30

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:16:27

¶31

impugned order with regard to the infrastructure, the number of teachers etc. is concerned, the same are curable and the petitioner will cure them in a time bound manner. She, however, contends that since the school has been disaffiliated even upto secondary level, it has become difficult for the school to arrange good teachers, as any teacher with experience is not willing to join the school which has no affiliation with CBSE.

¶32

She thus, contends that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondent/CBSE with a request to restore the affiliation upto Secondary Level and the petition may be disposed of. She further submits that the impugned order to the extent it disaffiliates the petitioner school upto secondary level may not be given effect to till the disposal of petitioner’s representation by the CBSE. 9. In view of the limited prayer articulated by Ms. Kaul, this Court is of the view that the present petition can be disposed of with liberty as aforesaid.

¶33

Accordingly, regard being had to the undertaking given by the petitioner apropos curing of deficiencies as pointed out in the order dated 24.02.2025, in a time bound manner, liberty is granted to the petitioner to make representation to the CBSE, within a period of ten working days, requesting for restoration of its affiliation up to secondary level. If any such representation is made, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the CBSE within two weeks thereafter, by a speaking order, bearing in mind the curable nature of defects; the steps taken or to be taken by the petitioner school to cure the same and most importantly, the interest of the students studying classes IX and X. The CBSE shall be at liberty to conduct fresh inspection of the petitioner school, if deemed appropriate.

¶34

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:16:27

¶35

Further, keeping in mind that the students studying in classes IX and X of the petitioner school are also adversely affected and displaced by the impugned decisions, it is directed that the order dated 24.02.2025 and the impugned order dated 02.04.2025, to the extent they disaffiliate the petitioner school for the secondary level, shall not be given effect to, till the passing of speaking order.

¶36

Needless to say, that the petitioner school will not run classes XI and XII nor will it induct any fresh students for said classes.

¶37

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶38

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

¶39

MAY 6, 2025/dss

¶40

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:16:27

Central Academy International School v. Central Board of Secondary Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Academy International School v. Central Board of Secondary Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitin Saxena Vs the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Anr.

Mubasshir Hasan Vs Union of India and Ors.

Smt Rekha Rathore Vs Union of India & Ors.

Au Small Finance Bank Limited Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Abdul Gaffar Prop. M/S Farhad Traders Vs Union of India & Anr.

Raj Kumar Aggarwal(through Legal Heir Sandeep Aggarwal) Vs Union of India & Anr.

Kmtc (India) Private Limited Vs Sales Tax Officer Class Ii/Avato, Ward 94 & Ors.

M/S A.S. Builders Vs Union of India & Anr.

M/S Vva Developers Pvt. Ltd. through Its Authorised Representative Vs Vinod Tyagi

Asian Hotels North Limited Vs Bank of Maharashtra

M/S Vva Developers Pvt. Ltd. through Its Authorised Representative Vs Aditi Tyagi

Royal Trading Company Vs Union of India & Ors.

Aryan Maan Vs Delhi University and Ors.

M/S Gautam Properties (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Delhi Development Authority and Anr.