MOHAMAD IMRAN SHAIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a wholly misconceived Public Interest Litigation ["PIL' for short] filed by the petitioner who claims to be a businessman and social worker and Vice-President of the religious organization and NGO, to assail the Government Resolution dtd. 4/8/2020 which prescribes the standards of operating procedure for complying with the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 ["RTE Act, 2009' for short] read with the Rules namely, the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2012 framed by the State of Gujarat. It was argued before us that the Clause-3 of the Government Resolution dtd. 4/8/2020 runs contrary to the provisions of Sec. 12(c) of the RTE Act, 2009 inasmuch as, it provides for computation of 25% upon deduction from the total strength of the students of Standard-1 admitted in the last academic year. The contention is that because of raising of age for admission in Standard-1 from minimum 5 years to 6 years, there has been huge gap in number of students admitted in the previous academic years than the last academic year, i.e. 2022-2023, and the same gap would be there in the current academic session, i.e. 2024-2025. The submission is that the number of seats allotted to the students under the RTE Act, 2009 in 25% quota would be negligible in the private schools in the State of Gujarat, for the above noted facts. The assertion in the writ petition is that due to decline of seats/admission based on last academic year, the interest of the poor children in the State in the current academic session 2024-2025 would be seriously hampered.

(2.) Further contention is that in the last year, the admission procedure was conducted for total 82,853 seats in 9,873 private schools, out of which 52,395 students were admitted at the end of the three rounds of admission. The result is that 44% of the total seats under RTE have been decreased last year.

(3.) All submissions with regard to the data as narrated in the writ petition are hypothetical and there is no research or collection of data as to the number of children belonging to the poor strata of society, who would be deprived of by taking admission in a private school under 25% quota, if the contention of the petitioner is accepted that due to gap on account of increase in age, lesser number of children would get admission in the current academic session. Moreover, the petitioner has straight-away approached this Court by means of a PIL without bringing this fact to the knowledge of the competent authority.