MISS SOUMYADIPA DATTA & ANOTHER v. STATE OF TRIPURA &
Case Details
Case No :WP(C) 305/2012 Party Name : MISS SOUMYADIPA DATTA & ANOTHER Vs STATE OF TRIPURA & 10 ORS. HON''BLE MR JUSTICE U B SAHA
Legal Reasoning
The writ petitioners, namely Ms Soumyadipa Datta and Ms Ashmita Das Gupta, who are minors, filed the instant writ petition through their respective fathers, for a direction to the State respondents for quashing the admission notice dated 2nd January, 2012 and the admission of the respondent Nos. 8 to 11 and also to quash the order dated 14.05.2012 wherein the Secretary cum Director, School Education ordered for admission of the petitioners in Sakhicharan HS (Primary Section) School, Agartala and Bijoy Kumar Girls’ HS (Primary Section) School, Agartala respectively being those schools are the neighbourhood schools of the petitioners. Heard Mr. P Roy Barman, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. BC Das, learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. B Datta, learned State counsel appearing for the State respondents. Also heard Mr. TD Majumdar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and Ms R Purakayastha, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8. The present petitioners earlier also filed a writ petition being WP(C) 175/2012 which was disposed of on 05.05.2012 by the following order:- “…………..In view of the above, the Director of School Education, Govt. of Tripura is directed to dispose of the representations of the parents of the present petitioners (Annexure-P9 and P10 to the writ petition) within a period of 10 days from today by a reasoned order taking note of Section 3 and Section 6 of the Act, 2009. Petitioners are also directed to furnish a copy of this writ petition to the Director of School Education, Govt. of Tripura along with a copy of this order so that while disposing of the representations of the parents of the petitioners, the Director of School Education, Govt. of Tripura can also consider the contentions made in the instant writ petition. It is made clear that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the order of the Director of School Education, Govt. of Tripura, then they are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum, in accordance with law.” Consequent to the aforesaid order, the parents of the present petitioners submitted a representation to the Director of School Education on 09.05.2012 and upon receipt of the representation along with the copy of the writ petition as well as the copy of the order of this Court, the Director of School Education vide his order dated 14.05.2012 passed an order for admission of the petitioners in Sakhicharan HS (Primary Section) School, Agartala and Bijoy Kumar Girls’ HS (Primary Section) School, Agartala respectively, as stated supra. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 14.05.2012 the fathers of the petitioners on 22.05.2012 submitted another representation to the Secretary/Director of School Education raising all their grievances which is as follows:- “…….4. That, Honble High Court gave categorical direction to your good office to dispose of the representations of the parents of the Petitioners, i.e. Annexure P/9 & P/10. But surprisingly, in the Order, dated, 14-05-2012, no whisper had been made as to whether the representations of the parents of the Petitioners, i.e. Annexure P/9 and P/10 to the Writ Petition, had been at all considered or not. in this two representations we made specific and categorical averment to the effect, that, the entire selection process was reduced to a farce by giving admission to those students, whose residences are not within the neighbourhood area of Shishu Bihar H.S. School. We also pointed out to you good office, that, this was made possible only by treating the Certificate of the local Councilor instead of ROR, issued by the competent authority, as proof of the residence within the neighbourhood area of Shishu Bihar HS School for admission to Class I of the Shishu Bihar H.S. School. But in the Order, dated, 14-05-2012, there is no indication as to whether our specific grievences had been considered. The Hon’ble High Court also, in the Order, referred to the specific instance, given in the Writ Petition as to how in respect of Respondent no. 9 i.e. Miss Sayanti Das, certificate of the Councilor had been taken as proof to the effect, that, she has been residing within the neighbourhood area of Shishu Bihar H.S. School, while ex-facie the certificate, itself is not acceptable and tenable. The Hon’ble High Court, by order, dated, 05-05-2012, while directing your good office to dispose of the representations of the parents of the Petitioners i.e. Annexure P/9 & P/10 also directed your good office to consider the contention of the Writ etition. In the Writ Petition, we have given specific and categorical instances, as to why, those, who were not eligible to be admitted to Shishu Bihar H.S. School, had been given admission on the basis of the certificate of the local councilor despite the fact, that, those certificates, on their face value were not acceptable and tenable. Moreover, as per provisions of the Act, 09, only record of residence, maintained by local authority, can be only treated as proof of document in respect to the location of the residence of the concerned student within the neighbouhood area of the school…….” As the said representation has not yet been disposed of the petitioners filed the present writ petition. Mr. Roy Barman submits that though this Court vide its order dated 05.05.2012 directed the Director of School Education to dispose of the representation of the petitioner’s parents taking note of Section 3 and 6 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short, “Act, 2009”) and also to consider the contentions made in the writ petition but the same was not complied with. He further submits that as the petitioners could not be admitted due to pendency of the instant writ petition as well as the alleged inaction of the respondents, on 29.06.2012 an interim order was passed after hearing the parties and considering the facts involved in this case, directing the respondents to keep two seats vacant in Class-I of Shishu Bihar H.S. School, pending otherwise directed by this Court in the writ petition, meaning thereby that those two seats are still vacant and the petitioners could be accommodated. He further submits that the petitioners can be admitted in Class-II in view of Section 4 of the Act, 2009. Learned Advocate General submits that it is very difficult on the part of the State Government to accommodate each and every student in English Medium Schools. However, as two seats are apparently lying vacant in Class-I in view of the interim order passed by this Court, the instant writ petition can be disposed of with a simple direction to the Secretary, School Education, Govt. of Tripura to consider the representation of the fathers of the petitioners dated 22.05.2013 taking note of Section 4 of the Act, 2009. Mr. TD Majumdar as well as Ms Purakayastha have submitted that the private respondents have already been admitted and they have already been promoted to class-II and thus their admission cannot be interfered with. They also submitted that the instant writ petition has become infructuous due to lapse of time. There is no doubt that each and every student cannot be admitted in the chosen English medium school run by the government but expectation of the students will remain as each and every student would want to get admission in a better school. However, it would not be proper on the part of this Court to give any specific direction for admitting the petitioners in any particular class of any particular school but obviously the court can expect that the concerned authority will consider the case of the petitioners with some humane touch. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, this Court is of considered opinion that the admission of respondent Nos. 8 to 11 cannot be quashed as this stage as they have already been promoted to Class-II. It would meet justice if the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, School Education Department, Govt. of Tripura is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 22.05.2012 taking note of Sections 3, 4, 6 & 8 of the Act, 2009 as well as the order of this Court dated 05.05.2012 passed in WP(C) 175/2012 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Petitioners are directed to furnish a copy of the representation dated 22.05.2012 as well as a copy of this order along with the earlier order of this Court dated 05.05.2012 passed in WP(C) 175/2012 to the Commissioner cum Secretary, School Education Department within a period of one week from today. With the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of. Download Date: 8-05-2017 16:05 2/2