E-Paper
Order for merger of primary schools: Petitioners’ counsel alleges violation of Article 21A, UP govt justifies move
The state government justified its decision, asserting that the step is in the larger interest of students and for better utilisation of its resources.
Prefer HTon Google
The counsel for petitioners argued before the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court that the Uttar Pradesh government’s order for the merger of primary schools violates Article 21A of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to free and compulsory education for children between the ages of 6 and 14 years and a school within one km for a village having a population of 300.
On the other hand, the state government justified its decision, asserting that the step is in the larger interest of students and for better utilisation of its resources.
The hearing will continue on Friday in the court of Justice Pankaj Bhatia.
Fifty-one students from Sitapur – 50 from a primary school and one from the upper primary section – have approached the high court challenging the June 16 order of the state government for the merger of primary schools across UP. They approached the court through their guardian.
They opposed the merger, stating that it will cause difficulties for children who will have to travel farther to reach their new schools, affecting their right to free and compulsory education.
Senior advocate LP Mishra and Gaurav Mehrotra represented the petitioners in court.
“The Article 21A of the Indian Constitution, added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, guarantees the right to free and compulsory education for children between the ages of 6 and 14,” said Mishra.
“It makes primary education a fundamental right. It makes the state duty bound to provide free and compulsory education to all eligible children, and this right cannot be waived,” Mishra added.
“This Article also mandates that the government will have to set up a primary school within one km for a population of every 300 people so that small children do not have to travel far to reach school,” added Mishra.
“The government is duty bound to create resources for schools within these parameters,” Mishra argued in court.
On behalf of the state government, additional advocate general (AAG) Anuj Kudesia and chief standing counsel (CSC) Shailendra Kumar Singh argued in court.
Senior advocate Sandeep Dixit represented the basic education department.
Opposing the petition, AAG and CSC defended the state government’s June 16 order of merger of primary schools.
They argued that the government’s decision is in the larger interest of students and for better utilisation of resources.
The government counsel will continue their argument in court on Friday.
