Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Posted at: Apr 18, 2019, 8:08 AM; last updated: Apr 18, 2019, 8:08 AM (IST)

Child rights panel summons Ryan Int’l, Mount Carmel

Ryan justifies action, calls it a way of enforcing discipline

Naina Mishra
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, April 17

The Chandigarh Commission for Protection of Child Rights (CCPCR) today summoned Ryan International School, Sector 49, and Mount Carmel School, Sector 47, to appear before it tomorrow as both schools had recently asked parents to sign an undertaking restricting them from interacting with the media.

Though Ryan International School yesterday admitted in its reply to the commission that it had sought such undertaking from the parents, Mount Carmel School denied seeking any such undertaking for the purpose of admission.

It is pertinent to mention here that the commission deemed seeking indemnity bond from parents an unlawful practice as it thwarted the spirit of the Right to Education (RTE) Act.

Ryan school not only admitted that it took an undertaking from parents, but it also justified its action by calling the practice a way of enforcing discipline. It wrote: “The school is demanding the undertaking only to maintain discipline in the school and for the benefit of the child. Contents of the undertaking itself reveal that the objective to seek this type of undertaking is only to protect the children and the parents from some unwarranted elements in society.”

Ryan urges commission to dismiss complaint

Ryan International School clarified, “If two students are involved in an altercation then it cannot be ruled out that sometimes parents may also be involved in it. So, it is pertinent to mention here that if such kind of untoward incident is reported to the school authorities in time then they will definitely resolve it at its own level with the help of the psychologists/school counsellors.”

It said the step was ultimately good for children up to the age of 18 years as they needed counselling and any untoward incident ruined the whole life of students. The school said seeking an undertaking from parents did not prevent them from reporting any kind of untoward matter to the public authority, press, etc. It also urged the commission to dismiss the complaint.

The school further clarified that it was aware of its obligation of reporting criminal matters to public authorities.

Undertaking not a concern, rather threat: Complainant

  • Complainant Nitin Goyal, president of Chandigarh Parents’ Association, said, “Either they are incapable of comprehending the word protection or they are too confused to decipher a decent way of saving their behinds. If protection is their sole concern, it’s quite astonishing that such a renowned school does not know how to articulate it properly. It is beyond one’s doubts that their undertaking did not show an iota of concern, rather sounded more like a threat. A threat towards anti-school activities and parents approaching media or a third party, a stark opposite to their example in revert.”
  • “On one hand, they have made a brazen attempt to justify their illegal undertaking which seeks to take away the right of the parents to approach the press and other agencies, while on the other, the school contradicts itself by saying that the undertaking does not prevent any parents to report any kind of untoward matter to the public authority, press etc. which renders the undertaking useless. Any stipulation to strike off the name of the child is illegal, they can’t overrule the fundamental law in the name of discipline.” 


All readers are invited to post comments responsibly. Any messages with foul language or inciting hatred will be deleted. Comments with all capital letters will also be deleted. Readers are encouraged to flag the comments they feel are inappropriate.
The views expressed in the Comments section are of the individuals writing the post. The Tribune does not endorse or support the views in these posts in any manner.
Share On