Preference to siblings in school admission global practice: HC
Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, December 24
Dubbing the preference given to siblings of ex-students in school admissions as an international phenomenon, a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled the practice is prevalent in the best schools and universities across the world.
The assertion by the Bench of Justice Mahesh Grover and Justice Lalit Batra came on a petition filed against the State of Punjab and other respondents by a minor through his father after he was denied admission to pre-nursery by Yadavindra Public School (YPS), Mohali.
The petitioner’s argument was that 25 per cent of the seats were required to be reserved for the economically weaker sections in accordance with the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. Taking up the matter, the High Court had initially asserted that it did not find ground to interfere with the impugned order to the extent of denying admission to the petitioner, merely because he was eligible and had applied for admission.
At the same time, the Bench had issued a notice of motion for examining whether the respondent-school was competent to reserve 15 seats for old Yadavindrians; 15 for siblings and 10 for management; and what were the duties and responsibilities of the district admission monitoring committee.
Referring to the guidelines giving schools unfettered powers to fill 75 per cent seats while putting 25 per cent at the disposal of the economically weaker section in accordance, the state counsel had contended that the provisions of the Act the petitioner sought to invoke was not even applicable to pre-nursery class admissions.
Appearing before the Bench, YPS, Mohali, counsel Kanwalvir Singh Kang submitted that the school had a transparent admission policy, which was in consonance with the guidelines framed by the HRD Ministry. As such, the school was well within its constitutional ambit to formulate its independent admission policy and with criteria for preference to categories, including alumni and sibling.
Justice Grover said the petitioner’s claim was not capable of being enforced, particularly when the admission to the classes was already over. The Bench said there would be no reason for it to comment on preference given to siblings of former students of the school, since the guidelines permitted flexibility to fill 75 per cent seats in the manner desired by the institution.
Referring to the issue of having admission monitoring committee, the Bench added that it was informed that such a panel was already in place vide a notification dated November 18, 2015, and the Deputy Commissioner was its incharge.
