Bouncers at school to block entry of students reprehensible: HC pulls up DPS Dwarka amid fee hike row
Justice Sachin Datta recorded the observations in a verdict while deciding an application moved by parents of 32 students who were expelled by the school over non-payment of pending dues.
Noting that DPS Dwarka had subsequently withdrawn the expulsion order and had reinstated the students, making the application moot, the court observed, 'This court is also constrained to express its dismay at the alleged conduct of the petitioner school in engaging bouncers to physically block entry of certain students into the school premises.'
'Such a reprehensible practice has no place in an institute of learning. It reflects not only disregard to the dignity of a child but also a fundamental misunderstanding of a school's role in society. The use of bouncers fosters a climate of fear, humiliation and exclusion that is incompatible with the fundamental ethos of a school,' the court underlined.
The court also reiterated that a school 'cannot be equated with a purely commercial establishment' as a school is 'rooted not in profit maximisation but in public welfare, nation building and the holistic development of children.'
'The primary objective of a school is to impart education and inculcate values, not to operate as a business enterprise…The school, no doubt, is entitled to charge appropriate fees, especially given the financial outlay required to sustain infrastructure, remunerate staff and provide a conducive learning environment. However, the school is different from a normal commercial establishment, since it carries with it fiduciary and moral responsibilities towards its students,' the court recorded.
The bench further underlined that in case the school decides to take any action in future under Rule 35 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, which deals with striking off of students from the school's roll, it will issue a prior communication – specifically putting the students concerned or their parents or guardians to notice — as to the date on which the students are proposed to be struck off the rolls. The school is bound to give a reasonable opportunity to show cause against such action, the court said.
Disposing of the application, the High Court emphasised that the parents concerned 'are obliged to adhere and comply with the orders passed by this Court as regards payment of requisite fees to the school.'
Earlier on May 16, the High Court, observing that there is no embargo on schools hiking fees, had directed DPS Dwarka to allow the 102 students, whose parents had moved the court against the fee hike, to continue their studies, provided they deposit 50% of the hiked school fee for the 2024-25 academic year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
"If The Marriage...": Top Court Allows Spouse's Recorded Calls As Evidence
New Delhi: The secretly recorded telephonic conversation of a spouse is admissible evidence in a matrimonial dispute case, the Supreme Court ruled today. The top court set aside a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling that secretly recording a spouse's telephone conversation amounted to a breach of privacy and cannot be admitted as evidence in a family court. Dictating the order, Justice BV Nagarathna said some arguments have contended that allowing such conversations as evidence would jeopardise domestic harmony and matrimonial relationships and encourage snooping on spouses. "We don't think such an argument is tenable. If the marriage has reached a stage where spouses are actively snooping on each other, that is in itself a symptom of a broken relationship and denotes a lack of trust between them," Justice Nagarathna said while pronouncing the judgment. The bench also comprised Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. What Is The Case The matter, which first came up in a Bhatinda family court, involves divorce proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The husband accused his wife of cruelty and cited recorded phone conversations to prove his allegation. The family court allowed a CD with these recordings as evidence. The wife challenged this in the High Court, arguing that the calls were recorded without her consent and accepting them as evidence would breach her fundamental right to privacy. The high court agreed and set aside the family court's order. The bench said the responses over the call and the circumstances in which they were made could not be ascertained. The high court reiterated that spouses talk openly without considering that their words could be scrutinised in a courtroom. The husband challenged this ruling in the top court, which has now ruled in his favour.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
SC to hear plea seeking lifting of stay on ‘Udaipur Files' release—Details inside
(Picture Courtesy: Facebook) The Supreme Court of India has reportedly agreed to hear a plea challenging the Delhi High Court's interim stay on the release of the controversial film 'Udaipur Files.' The film is based on the 2022 murder of Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur, Rajasthan. According to PTI, the plea was mentioned by Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia on behalf of the film's producer, who argued that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has already cleared the film for public viewing and that preventing its release violates the filmmaker's fundamental rights. The Delhi High Court had stayed the release, citing public order concerns. The Delhi High Court, on July 10, ordered a stay on the film's release just a day before its scheduled opening following petitions by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind and journalist Prashant Tandon. The court ruled that the stay would remain in force until the Central Government decides on a revision application challenging the CBFC's decision to certify the film. Censor Board makes 150 cuts to 'The Udaipur Files', film based on Kanhaiya Lal murder case A Division Bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal stated that the release of the film must be put on hold while the petitioners pursue legal remedies under the Cinematograph Act, 1952. Concerns over communal harmony and electoral timing Reportedly, the petitioners argue that 'Udaipur Files,' which portrays the brutal daylight killing of tailor Kanhaiya Lal allegedly for supporting Nupur Sharma, may start communal tensions and disturb public order. The petitioners also say that this is highlighted, especially given the film's release timing just ahead of state elections. While refraining from commenting on the film's content, the Delhi High Court noted the importance of following due legal procedure and avoiding irreparable harm before the matter is fully adjudicated. About 'Udaipur Files' Inspired by the real-life murder of Kanhaiya Lal Sahu, 'Udaipur Files' is directed by Bharat S Shrinate and stars Vijay Raaz, Rajneesh Duggal, Preeti Jhangiani, Kamlesh Sawant, and Kanchi Singh in pivotal roles.
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
Supreme Court agrees to hear ‘Udaipur Files' producer's plea against Delhi HC order on film's stay
The Supreme Court Monday agreed to hear 'in a day or two,' an appeal challenging the Delhi High Court order staying the release of the movie Udaipur Files: Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder based on the crime carried out by alleged Islamic fundamentalists in the city in Rajasthan. Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, who appeared for the producers of the movie, mentioned the appeal against the Delhi High Court order before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, seeking an urgent listing. The HC order came on July 10, a day ahead of its scheduled release on July 11. Bhatia said the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) had cleared Udaipur Files for release, and theatres were booked. 'I had the certificate. All theatres were booked…'. He pointed out that the SC had refused to give an urgent hearing to a plea by an accused in the case seeking a stay on the film's release. 'I must say with some responsibility that it's a case of violation of fundamental rights. SC refused to give a hearing, but Delhi HC interfered and stayed the release,' he said. Bhatia added that advance ticket bookings were accepted, and all arrangements were in place for the film's release, when the Delhi High Court issued the stay. The Delhi High Court order came on a plea by Maulana Arshad Madani, the principal of the Darul Uloom Deoband, and others. They contended that the movie, purportedly based on the murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal by alleged Islamic fundamentalists in 2022, is 'replete with dialogues and instances that had led to communal disharmony in the very recent past and thus carry every potential to again stoke the same communal sentiments'. The Division Bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal relegated the petitioner to the Central government to seek a review of CBFC's decision to grant a certificate green-lighting the release of the film. The HC-directed stay shall be operational until the Centre decides on the application for interim relief that Madani may request, including suspension from the exhibition of the film. As per the court-directed timelines, the HC-directed stay can then range from July 14 until a maximum of July 21. CBFC informed the high court that the film had already undergone 55 cuts that it directed the makers to incorporate. The Centre, too, argued that the film is not community-specific but rather 'crime-specific'. Kanhaiya Lal was allegedly hacked to death by Mohammad Riyaz and Ghouse Mohammad at his shop in Udaipur on June 28, 2022, over a post shared by him on social media in support of suspended BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, who made some comments about the Prophet during a live television debate.
