Disposed

Master Adit Raj (through His Mother Madhvi Devi) v. Directorate of Education (Doe) and Ors.

Delhi HC4 Feb 2026W.P.(C)/1526/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

EWS student alleged private school demanded impermissible fees, threatened expulsion, withheld textbooks, uniform and Class III-IV results. Directorate of Education undertook compliance; court directed school to comply with DoE directions and declare results immediately. Petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondent school to comply with DoE instructions under the RTE Act and Rule 11(3), and immediate declaration of petitioner's Class III and IV results.

Master Adit Raj (through His Mother Madhvi Devi) Vs… — Education and Admissions | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~63

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1526/2026

¶4

MASTER ADIT RAJ (THROUGH HIS MOTHER MADHVI DEVI)

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Ms. Garima, Adv.

¶7

versus

¶8

DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION (DOE) AND ORS.

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Panel Counsel(Civil), GNCTD, Mrs Chandrika Sachdev, Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advs. for R-1 to 3

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

04.02.2026

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:

¶16

“I. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing Respondent No. 4, DAV Public School, Ashok Vihar, Delhi-110052, to forthwith provide the Petitioner, who is admitted under the EWS category, with free and new textbooks, writing materials, and uniform for Class V and for all subsequent classes, in accordance with law, till the completion of senior secondary education.

¶17

II. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing Respondent No. 4 to provide the Petitioner with the free school uniforms, or in the alternative, to pay cash

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 09/02/2026 at 13:03:33

¶20

assistance towards the uniforms at the prescribed rates, as recorded in the file noting dated 13.05.2025 and as set out in Review Petition No. 475/2025 in W.P.(C)No. 3684/2013 titled “Justice for All v. GNCTD”.

¶21

III. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing Respondent No. 4 School to forthwith disclose and provide the Petitioner’s report cards for Classes III and IV without charging any fee, and to further ensure that the Petitioner’s academic results for all future classes are provided in a timely manner without any demand for fees or charges.

¶22

IV. Direction to constitute an independent inquiry committee to examine acts of dereliction of duty and non-compliance with the provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, and the Rules made thereunder by Respondent No.4 School and Respondent No.1, and to take appropriate action against all erring officials in accordance with law...”

¶23

Ms. Garima, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner belongs to Economically Weaker Section (“EWS”) category and the respondent No. 4 school is flouting the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, as well as the Rule 11(3) of the Delhi Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011, by demanding payment in various forms such as admission fee, Id card fee, club fee. She also states that the respondent No. 4 school threatened the petitioner with expulsion if he fails to make the aforesaid fee payments and the respondent No. 4 is also not providing free and new textbook, stationery and uniform to the petitioner.

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 09/02/2026 at 13:03:33

¶26

Additionally, the respondent No. 4 school has also withheld the results of 3^rd and 4^th standard of the petitioner on account of non-payment of the requisite fee.

¶27

For the said reasons, issue notice.

¶28

Mr. Rohatgi, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3.

¶29

There is nobody appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 4, however in view of the urgency of the matter, the present petition is being taken up for hearing.

¶30

Mr. Rohatgi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3 states that the respondent No. 1 i.e. the Directorate of Education (DoE) has already written a letter dated 02.02.2026 to the respondent No. 4 school in this regard and will ensure that the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, as well as the Rule 11(3) of the Delhi Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011, are duly complied with.

¶31

In this view of the matter, the respondent No. 4 is directed to comply with the directions of the DoE and also that the results of 3^rd and 4^th standard of the petitioner shall be declared immediately.

¶32

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms along with pending applications, if any.

¶33

In case the petitioner has any surviving grievances, the petitioner will be entitled to revive the petition.

¶34

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶35

FEBRUARY 4, 2026/DM

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

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 09/02/2026 at 13:03:33

Master Adit Raj (through His Mother Madhvi Devi) v. Directorate of Education (Doe) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Master Adit Raj (through His Mother Madhvi Devi) v. Directorate of Education (Doe) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piraivanmathi P Vs Directorate of Education and Ors.

M/S Iifl Home Finance Ltd. Vs Sagar Aggarwal & Ors.

Dr Gitanjali Dey Vs Punjab National Bank through Branch Manager Vikas Puri

Amit Jain Vs General Manager Canara Bank & Ors.

Dr Bipin Batra Vs National Board of Examinations and Another

Resident Welfare Association Pocket- K and Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Santhi Caterers Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kartik Rana Vs Airport Authority of India

Dr Gitanjali Dey Vs Punjab National Bank through Branch Manager Vikas Puri

Raj Kumari Vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

Dr. Subhash Giri Vs Delhi Development Authority

Pankaj Kumar Vs Special Task Force and Others

Rathod Nidhi Kiran Vs National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences & Ors.

Ram Lal Arya Vs DDA