HC reserves verdict on pleas against merger of schools
A bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia passed the order on two separate petitions filed by Krishna Kumari and others.
The petitioners have demanded the cancellation of the state govt's order of June 16 regarding the merger.
The petitioners' counsel L P Mishra and Gaurav Mehrotra had stressed that the state govt's action was in violation of the right to education given to children between 6 and 14 years under Article 21A of the Constitution because it would deprive them of the right to education in their neighbourhood . It was said that if the number of students in a school is low, the govt should try to improve the level of the school so that more children get enrolled.
It was said that instead of doing this, the state govt found an easier way to close those schools by merger or some other means. It was argued that the Constitution of India expects the govt to work like a welfare state in which the welfare of the people should be kept in mind more than economic gain and loss.
On the other hand, additional advocate general Anuj Kudesia and chief standing counsel Shailendra Singh as well as senior advocate Sandeep Dixit, appearing on behalf of director of basic education, argued that the govt has taken the decision as per the rules and there is no flaw and illegality in it.
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Unbelievable: Calculator Shows The Value Of Your House Instantly (Take a Look)
Home Value Calculator
Search Now
Undo
by Taboola
by Taboola
It was said that there are many schools which do not have even a single student. It was also argued that the govt has not done any merger, but only schools have been paired.
It was also said that the primary schools which have been paired are not being closed.
In course of hearing, Kudesia repeatedly demanded from the court to ban the reporting of this case. It was said that the entire proceedings of this case are being reported, which is tarnishing the image of govt lawyers. However, Justice Bhatia outrightly rejected this demand and said that the govt, if it wants, may frame law but the court would not do this.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Jamaat-e-Islami leaders divided after new political alliance
Leaders of banned Jamaat-e-Islami appear divided after Justice Development Front, a new political front of banned Jamaat--Justice and Development Front (JDF), decided to become part of a new political amalgam - People's Alliance for Change (PAC). Earlier, PC chairman Sajad Lone had said that the decision to form the alliance came after months of consultations and promised this alliance will change the two party system in Kashmir. (File) This new alliance was announced by People's Conference(PC) led by Sajad Lone, Jamaat-e-Islami affiliated JDF, which fought recent assembly elections, and People's Democratic Front (PDF) led by Hakeem Yaseen. They had called this an electoral alliance for the future. However, after the formation of the new alliance, two former Jamaat-e-Islami leaders, who once served as head of Jamaat, came out publicly saying that the alliance has nothing to do with Jamaat cadres as the party has been banned. They said that they might approach the Supreme Court to end the ban. 'I am surprised how people are saying the new alliance is backed by Jamaat-e-Islami. Everyone knows Jamaat is banned,' said former chief Amir Mohammad Abdullah Wani in a video message being circulated on social media. Wani termed it as a big injustice. 'I want to make it clear Jamaat doesn't back any party, front or alliance. This is a ploy to create confusion. We had made a panel to convince the government that Jamaat is a peaceful organisation. Unfortunately the panel failed and it has no value now. So we are all staying silent.' Another former chief of Jamaat, Ghulam Mohammad Bhat, also said the four member panel which was constituted has failed. 'Whatever the panel is doing now it's against Jamaat and its activities. We have nothing to do with them and their way of constitution is completely against the 85 years of Jamaat-e-Islami in Kashmir.' However, the Jamaat panel, which is backing Justice Development Front, in a press conference on Friday said the panel will work till the ban on Jamaat-e-Islami isn't lifted. 'We have created the front to convey a message that we are peace loving people ready to work under the Constitution of India and under existing do admit we failed to remove the ban but our struggle will continue,' said panel head Ghulam Qadir Wani. He said that they aren't forcing any Jamaat-e-Islami worker to become part of front. 'We can't sit idle at home and get things resolved. We won't force anyone to be part of this front.' He termed the new alliance as the need of the day. 'We will make not only the JDF strong but also will work for a stronger alliance,' Wani said while acknowledging they made people vote in the last assembly and Parliament elections. Earlier, PC chairman Sajad Lone had said that the decision to form the alliance came after months of consultations and promised this alliance will change the two party system in Kashmir. Though PC and JDF contested last assembly elections separately, however, Sajjad could win one seat while on four other seats his candidates emerged as runner up. JDF got good votes in Kulgam losing a seat with thin margin. However, together there are chances of it becoming a formidable group which can be problematic for the traditional parties in the political arithmetic of Kashmir. Justice and Development Front (JDF) was launched by Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) affiliated candidates early this year after the central government imposed a five-year ban on the Jamaat-e-Islami, Jammu and Kashmir, in 2019, citing the outfit's alleged ties with militant groups. Last year, some 10 such candidates participated in the elections as Independents, including the prominent Sayyar Ahmad Reshi and Talat Majid in south Kashmir with no success on any seat, though Reshi managed to gather a formidable vote percentage in south Kashmir. People's Democratic Front (PDF) led by Hakeem Yaseen has a good following in Khansahib area of central Kashmir, though he lost the elections in 2024 after being its MLA for three consecutive terms. Jamaat-e-Islami has been participating in elections till 1987 and it was part of the Muslim United Front. After the start of militancy, Jamaat-e-Islami didn't participate in elections, however many of its cadres preferred to vote for People's Democratic Party.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC to decide validity of Madras HC stay on Tamil Nadu law on University VC appointments
NEW DELHI: The on Friday entertained Tamil Nadu's petition questioning reasonableness of Madras HC's order staying its legislation, which gave the state government, instead of the governor, the power to appoint University vice-chancellors, but refused M K Stalin government's plea for suspending the HC order to re-operationalize the law. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now TN fielded a team of senior advocates – A M Singhvi, Rakesh Dwivedi and P Wilson – to argue that the HC had without considering the urgency to appoint vice-chancellors to universities, recommendations to which effect has been put in cold-storage by the Governor, stayed the legislation. The law giving state govt the power to appoint VCs to universities was stayed along with nine other laws, Bills for which were reserved for the President's consideration by the governor but were regarded as deemed to have been approved by President in a controversial unprecedented ruling by a two-judge SC bench on Apr 8. Three days after the 'deemed to have been approved' ruling by the SC, which now is subject to a Constitution bench's opinion on a Presidential Reference questioning the use of Article 142 power of the SC to virtually obliterate roles assigned by the Constitution to President and Governors on Bills passed by Assemblies, the TN govt had notified the nine bills as laws. The bench refused to stay the HC order but asked the UGC and the public interest litigation petitioner before the HC to respond to TN's petition in four weeks. For UGC, solicitor general Tushar Mehta said the law is palpably contrary to the UGC Regulations which empower only governors to appoint VCs to the universities. When the senior advocates pleaded that they would argue before the HC for vacation of the stay, Mehta said that in that case the TN must withdraw its petition seeking transfer of the PIL from Madras HC to the SC. 'The state cannot have both options open at the same time and be permitted to argue before the HC that the SC is considering transfer of the PIL to itself,' he said. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Wilson sought expunging of certain 'harsh remarks' against him by the HC merely because he was pointing out the SC's 2-J bench order. Justices Narasimha and Mahadevan said this request would be considered by the SC during the final hearing on the TN's petition. One of the Acts, notified on Apr 11 by the state related to vesting in the state govt the powers of the Governor, as Chancellor, to appoint vice-chancellors of universities in the state. A vacation bench of the HC on May 21 granted stay on this amending provision, holding that UGC Regulations, 2018, would prevail over the state legislation by virtue of doctrine of repugnancy. The state said it had raised the objection to the delay in filing of the PIL but the division bench of the HC 'did not even call for an explanation from the Registry of the HC or the Petitioner but proceeded to hear the case in a tearing hurry.' The HC 'showed undue haste', did not even give a week's time to the state to file its counter affidavit, and passed the stay order 'for extraneous reasons', it said, adding that the impugned order is replete with personal attacks on the senior counsel who appeared for the state.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'Congress fighting to save Constitution'
Deputy Chief Minister Bhatti Vikramarka declared that India is facing an ideological battle. He stated that the Congress and INDIA bloc are fighting to safeguard the Constitution, while the BJP and NDA alliance seek to amend it for their political advantage. HYDERABAD: Deputy chief minister Bhatti Vikramarka on Friday said the nation is in the midst of an ideological battle, with the Congress and INDIA bloc fighting to protect the Constitution, while the BJP and NDA alliance aim to amend it to suit their political agenda. "Without the Constitution, India's poor, Dalits, tribals, and backward communities would be voiceless. . We must protect it at all costs," he asserted.
