HC tell school to re-admit autistic Class 1 girl student
Justice Vikas Mahajan in a ruling delivered on Tuesday, criticised the school's failure to provide adequate support, observing that its actions amounted to a denial of the child's statutory right to inclusive education.
The court said that inclusive education under the Act is not a symbolic ideal, but a legally enforceable right.
'No child can be deprived merely due to the institutional unwillingness to adapt. It needs no emphasis that 'inclusive education' is not merely about access to education; it is about belongingness. It is also about recognising that every child has a place in the classroom not because they are the same, but because they are different, and that difference enriches the learning environment for all,' the judge ruled.
The girl was initially admitted to GD Goenka School in 2021. After being diagnosed with mild autism in 2022, her mother requested a shadow teacher or special educator to assist her. The school, however, failed to provide the necessary support, pressuring the family until they withdrew her in January 2023.
In the 2024-25 session, she was again allotted a seat at GD Goenka under the children with special needs (CWSN) category, but the school refused admission. A subsequent allotment at Maxfort School, Pitampura, was also denied. Her parents then approached the Delhi High Court, seeking enforcement of her right to education.
The school, represented by advocate Kamal Gupta, opposed the petition, arguing there were no vacancies in the general or CWSN categories and that right to education must be weighed against seat limitations and institutional readiness.
He further argued that right to education in a neighbourhood or special school was contingent upon availability and suitability, and cannot override seat limitations or institutional readiness.
Rejecting the school's defence, the court held in its 28-page verdict that its conduct reflected a regressive approach. 'Her behaviour, flagged by the school, should have triggered support. Instead, the school's response was one of distancing,' the order noted. 'The actions of the school reveal an institutional approach that failed to evolve in consonance with the needs of the petitioner as a person with disabilities.'
Welcoming the decision, the girl's lawyer, Ashok Agarwal, called it a landmark judgment. 'This verdict fulfils the constitutional promise of inclusive education. Disabled children have been sidelined for far too long—this ruling is a vital corrective,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
37 minutes ago
- The Hindu
BSP leader Armstrong murder: Brother moves Madras High Court seeking CBI probe
The Madras High Court, on Thursday (July 3, 2025) directed the Sembium police in Chennai to file its counter affidavit to a plea seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the murder of former Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) state president K. Armstrong on July 5, 2024. Justice P. Velmurugan directed Additional Public Prosecutor R. Muniyapparaj to ensure the counter was filed by July 18 and directed the High Court Registry to list the plea, filed by the late politician's younger brother K. Immanuvel, for further hearing on July 21. The petitioner had sought transfer of the case from Greater Chennai City police to CBI on the ground that there were serious contradictions and material shortcomings in the probe conducted by the Sembium police leading to doubts over the impartial nature of the investigation. In his affidavit, the petitioner complained that the Sembium police had concluded the investigation in October 2024 and filed a 5,000-page charge sheet against 30 named individuals by projecting gang rivalry, and not any political reason, as the sole motive behind the murder. 'Political angles excluded' 'The deceased was an active Dalit rights advocate. Yet, political angles and threats from vested interests have been consciously excluded. The deliberate anchoring of motive to an alleged gang rivalry is an attempt to insulate political perpetrators,' the petitioner told the court. He also brought to the notice of the court that eight armed assailants, disguised as food delivery agents, had hacked the politician to death as reflected in the First Information Report but the police had gone about listing as many as 30 accused in the charge sheet without arresting some of them. Pointing out that the charge sheet itself states that at least two key conspirators were absconding, the petitioner said, the failure to apprehend them 'signifies either collusion, dereliction, or political shielding.' The petitioner also accused the police of having deliberately ignored the statements of key witnesses. He said, the statements given by the Armstrong's wife Porkodi and the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry chairman P.S. Amalraj had not been taken into consideration. 'This selective approach undermines the investigation's objectivity and reveals an attempt to construct a preferred narrative,' he added. The petitioner also relied upon a few Supreme Court decisions to contend that a CBI probe could be ordered even after the city police had completed the investigation and filed a final report before the jurisdictional court.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Mamata Banerjee urges Amit Shah to tackle provocative social media content – ‘potential to inflame communal sentiments'
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Thursday wrote to Union Home Minister Amit Shah expressing concern over the rising impact of provocative social media content and cybercrime. The Trinamool Congress chief stressed the need for stringent legislative and policy interventions. In the two-page letter to Shah, Mamata Banerjee refers to recent 'incendiary narratives, misleading stories and fake videos' on social media, which have 'significantly contributed to aggravation of criminal tendencies among certain sections of society'. 'Such content not only spreads misinformation but also has the potential to inflame communal sentiments, incite violence, disrupt societal harmony and indulge in crime against women,' Banerjee wrote. 'The instantaneous and wide-reaching nature of misuse of digital platforms amplifies these effects manifold.' In April this year, the Muslim-majority district of Murshidabad witnessed large-scale violence, which began as a protest against the passed Waqf (Amendment) Act and quickly spiralled out of control into communal riots, resulting in multiple deaths and widespread damage to public and private property. More recently, in June, violence of a communal nature broke out at Maheshtala under the Diamond Harbour police district in the outskirts of Kolkata. The clashes left about a dozen police personnel, including the deputy commissioner of the Port area, injured. The state has also witnessed communal violence in districts like Howrah and Hooghly in the recent past over Ram Navami celebrations. In the aftermath of almost all these incidents, Banerjee has remained vocal about the spread of lies and misinformation on social media which, she maintained, added fuel to the fire. In her letter to Shah, Banerjee also highlighted the menace of an alarming surge in cybercrime which, she said, is 'growing both in complexity and in its detrimental impact'. 'From financial frauds and identity theft to online harassment and defamation, cybercrimes are exacting a severe toll on individuals and institutions alike,' the chief minister wrote. The Chief Minister said that both provocative social media posts and cybercrimes disproportionately affect vulnerable sections of society – women, children, the elderly and the economically weak – Banerjee urged the introduction of stringent legislative measures to serve as an effective deterrent to the two crime formats. 'The current legal framework and its enforcement require further strengthening to keep pace with the rapidly evolving digital ecosystem and the sophisticated methods employed by malicious actors,' she said. The chief minister also urged the Union Home Minister to launch large-scale awareness campaigns to promote responsible digital behaviour alongside sensitisation programmes, digital literacy campaigns, and community engagement initiatives. Key Takeaways Provocative social media content can incite violence and disrupt societal harmony. Cybercrime poses significant threats to vulnerable groups, necessitating stronger legal frameworks. Awareness campaigns and digital literacy are crucial in combating misinformation and promoting responsible online behavior.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Government to initiate removal motion against Justice Yashwant Varma
The government will begin the process of collecting signatures for a motion to remove Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma soon, as most of the prominent political parties have accepted, in principle, to support the motion. The Government is set to begin the process of collecting signatures for a motion seeking the removal of Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, with several major political parties having expressed their willingness, in principle, to support the initiative. Union Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Kiren Rijiju on Wednesday (July 2, 2025) said that while the process of obtaining signatures would commence shortly, a decision was yet to be taken on whether the motion would be introduced in the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha. A minimum of 100 Members of Parliament (MPs) is required for the Lok Sabha, and at least 50 MPs for the Rajya Sabha, for such a motion to be admitted. The Monsoon Session of Parliament will begin on July 21 and conclude on August 21, following a last-minute extension of 10 days. President Droupadi Murmu gave assent to the revised schedule earlier in the day. 'The Government has enough business to conduct,' Mr. Rijiju said, without elaborating on the reasons for extending the session beyond the earlier end date of August 12. Even if the motion is introduced during the upcoming session, it is unlikely to reach a conclusion within the same period. Under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, once a motion for the removal of a judge is admitted in either House, the presiding officer is required to constitute a three-member committee to investigate the allegations forming the basis of the motion. This committee is composed of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the Chief Justice of a High Court, and a distinguished jurist. The committee must submit its report within three months, though an extension may be granted. Responding to speculation regarding the findings of a fact-finding panel led by the then CJI, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Mr. Rijiju clarified that such a report alone could not suffice to proceed with a removal motion in Parliament. He noted that the panel had not indicted Justice Varma, but had recommended the appropriate next steps, as the constitutional authority to remove a judge rests solely with Parliament. The case concerns a fire incident at Justice Varma's official residence in Delhi in March, during his tenure as a judge of the Delhi High Court. The incident led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of currency notes in the outhouse. Justice Varma reportedly denied knowledge of the cash. A Supreme Court-appointed in-house inquiry committee, however, reportedly found material to recommend removal after recording statements from several witnesses, including the judge. Justice Khanna subsequently wrote to the President and the Prime Minister, recommending Justice Varma's removal—thereby initiating the constitutional procedure for removal of a member of the higher judiciary.
