Page 1

‘REPORTABLE’

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5379-5380/2014 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition(C) Nos.10265-10266 of 2014)

Major Saurabh Charan and others etc.                   …..Appellants

Versus

Lt. Governor, NCT of Delhi and others etc.    ….Respondents      

JUDGMENT

M.Y. EQBAL, J.:

         Leave granted.

2.   Appellants have preferred these appeals by special leave  

against the interim order dated 3.4.2014 passed by the High  

Court of Delhi in LPA No.238 of 2014 and LPA No. 237 of 2014  

whereby the Division Bench of the High Court while adjourning  

the said appeals directed that the admission process shall be  

1

Page 2

allowed to be completed for the other categories of students  

except  the  candidates  of  the  appellants  who  have  been  

transferred to Delhi from different States of India.  

3.   The  present  appellants  were  transferred  to  Delhi  from  

different States of India.  As a result  of which many parents  

have to  give up the admission of  their  children in  previous  

places and have to shift  to Delhi in the mid of the session.  

Because of that, their children did not get admission in any of  

the schools in Delhi and lost one academic year.

4.  On 18.12.2013, Lt. Governor of NCT of Delhi made order to  

amend  Recognised  Schools  (Admission  Procedure  for  Pre-

Primary Class) Order, 2007, according to which admission to  

open seats in the schools shall be made only on the basis of  

following fixed  parameters  and points  and further  clarifying  

that vacant/unfilled seat(s), if any, shall be filled by draw of  

lots.

S.No Parameters/Criteria Points

2

Page 3

. 1. Neighbourhood up to 6 km 70 2. Sibling studying in school 20 3. Parent Alumni of School 05 4. Inter-State transfer case 05

Total 100

Notification  also  specified  separate  guidelines  for  Minority  

Schools,  Schools  setup for  specific  government services like  

Armed  Forces/Paramilitary  Forces/Central  Services/All  India  

Services.  But we shall  constrain ourselves to the admission  

procedure in private unaided recognized schools in Delhi.

5. On  14.2.2014,  guidelines  were  issued  by  the  

Directorate  of  Education  to  eliminate  any  possible  

malpractices under interstate transfer category cases.   The  

Department  instructed  schools  to  be  extra  vigilant  about  

possible manipulations under interstate transfer category and  

make  due  diligence  to  verify  the  genuineness  of  transfer  

certificates, including verification from the source of issue of  

such a certificate.  The Directorate of Education also instructed  

schools  to  prepare  data  of  applications  received  under  

3

Page 4

interstate transfer with particulars like number of applications,  

place  from  where  transfer  took  place,  and  number  of  

applications the schools have “specifically received from NCR  

that shares its border with Delhi”.  The Department also hinted  

at constituting a special team to conduct random inspections  

of schools for verification of claims and Schools shall produce  

such  certificates  for  the  inspection  of  the  team  specially  

constituted for this purpose by the Directorate of Education.   

6. To address the grievances of the parents in connection  

with the entry level admission in private unaided recognized  

schools  of  Delhi,  the  Directorate  of  Education on 17.2.2014  

constituted Inspection Team at each district  of  Delhi  with a  

direction  to  conduct  random  checking  for  verification  of  

certificates/documents submitted to ensure their genuineness  

and acceptability in term of fixed admission criteria.

7. While  hearing  matter,  the  High  Court  on  26.2.2014  

directed the State Government to take a decision with regard  

4

Page 5

to interstate transfer category and to issue a fresh schedule  

for  draw  of  lots  by  27.2.2014.   After  taking  cognizance  of  

complaints/representations  and  on  perusal  of  sample  data  

collected  by  the  Inspecting  Team  and  in  compliance  of  

aforesaid order of the High Court, the Directorate of Education  

on 27.2.2014 issued a  Notification and decided to  do away  

with the Inter-State Transfer Case criterion and deleted points  

of interstate transfer cases.   

8. Pursuant  to  aforesaid  Notification  dated  27.2.2014,  

following directions have been issued to Recognized Unaided  

Private Schools of Delhi for strict compliance:

1.  With  the  deletion  of  points  of  ‘inter  State  Transfer  Cases,  the  points  shall  be  determined  only  as  per  Neighborhood’  Sibling  studying  in  schools and ‘Parent Alumni of Schools criteria. 2.  The list(s)  already  declared  by  the  school  till  date will now get modified to the extent that those  seats assigned earlier to inter-state transfer case  category applicants shall stand vacated. 3.  If  the  school  has  conducted  draw  of  lots  for  those applicants securing 70 points that draw shall  

5

Page 6

remain valid for the selected/confirmed candidates  only.   Fresh  draw  of  lots  shall  be  held  for  remaining  applicants  having  70  points  including  wait  listed  applicants  and  those  applicants  who  were earlier securing 75 points because of Inter- State Transfer Case Category.

9. Aggrieved  by  this  notification,  appellants  moved  the  

High Court by filing Writ Petition No.1497/2014, upon which,  

the  High  Court  while  issuing  notice  on  6.3.2014  granted  

interim  stay  of  only  direction  no.3  and  directed  that  all  

candidates having equal marks shall be considered equally by  

conducting a fresh draw of lots, wherever necessary.  

10. Aggrieved  by  the  aforesaid  order  of  the  High  

Court, writ petitioners preferred LPA No.238/2014 before the  

Division  Bench  of  the  High  Court.   This  order  was  also  

challenged  in  LPA  No.237/2014  by  some  of  the  70  points  

holder  parents,  who were selected in  draw of  lots  but  their  

admission stand cancelled.   

6

Page 7

11. After hearing learned senior counsel on either side and  

after noting that the learned Single Judge himself was prima  

facie of the view that the inter-state transfer case category  

was validly done away with by virtue of the Notification dated  

27.2.2014  as  also  the  fact  that  the  appellant  therein  and  

those similarly situated were not parties before the learned  

Single Judge, the High Court on 3.4.2014 while adjourning the  

matter,  opined that the selection granted to the appellants  

and similarly situated persons ought to be confirmed.  The  

High Court directed that the first part of Condition no.3 of the  

Notification dated 27.2.2014 would operate with full  vigour.  

High  Court,  however,  deferred  its  decision  till  next  date of  

hearing  so  far  as  second  part  of  this  Condition  no.3  is  

concerned.   High  Court  also  directed  that  till  next  date  of  

hearing no fresh draw of lots shall take place.

12. We  have  heard  Mr.  Nidhesh  Gupta,  learned  senior  

counsel  appearing  for  the  appellants  and  Mr.  Raju  

7

Page 8

Ramachandran,  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the  

respondents.

13. Admittedly under the Notification dated 18th December,  

2013, the children of the appellants had become eligible for  

admission inter alia  on the basis of being children of parents  

who have been transferred inter State -  by being allotted 5  

points.  The appellants had participated in the draw of lots and  

secured  75% points  i.e.  70  points  for  Neighborhood  and  5  

points for Inter State Transfer, and were successful.  Acting on  

some information,  and  not  on  the  basis  of  a  case  by  case  

enquiry,  the  Administration  came   to  the  conclusion  that  

approximately 50% seats were being taken by those who had  

taken  the  Inter  State  Transfer  points  and  therefore  the  

Administration issued Notification dated 27th February, 2014,  

changing  the  very  basis  of  the  admission  granted  to  the  

appellants’  children,  by  deleting  the  points  for  Inter  State  

Transfer  cases  and  decided  to  determine  eligibility  on  the  

basis of Neighborhood Sibling.  

8

Page 9

14.  It  has  been  contended  by  learned  counsel  for  the  

appellants that  the very basis  of  the Notification dated 27th  

February,  2014,  that  approximately  50% of  the  seats  were  

being claimed by the appellants’ children under the Inter State  

Transfer  category  is  incorrect  since  data  provided  by  the  

Director  of  Education  before  the  High  Court  on  24.03.2014  

shows  that  the  number  of  seats  allocated  to  Inter  State  

Transfer category is 2925, which is not more than 9% of the  

total seats available for that category.  Therefore, the basis of  

the  Notification  that  approximately  50% of  the  Open  Seats  

were claimed by the claimants under the Inter State Transfer  

category is baseless.  However, according to learned counsel  

for  the  appellants  the  genuine  cases  had  already  been  

separated from the fake cases at an earlier stage and there  

were no reason to delete the points for Inter State Transfer  

category on this count.

15. These matters were heard on several dates in order to  

find out the solution.  Mr. Raju Ramachandran, learned senior  

9

Page 10

counsel  appearing  for  the  respondents,  has  not  given  

satisfactory answer to the question posed by us as to whether  

after the admission process started on the basis of Notification  

dated  18.12.2013,  can  it  be  changed  by  putting  a  fresh  

condition.

16. In  spite  of  several  opportunities  given  to  the  Delhi  

Administration, it has not been able to sort out the problems of  

accommodating  the  children  of  the  appellants  to  the  entry  

level, whose admission has been cancelled due to deletion of  

Inter-State  Transfer  points  vide  Notification  dated  27th  

February, 2014.

17. Indisputably, imparting elementary and basic education  

is a constitutional obligation on the States as well as societies  

running educational institutions.  This Court held that children  

are not only future citizens but also the future of the Earth.  

Elders in general and parents and teachers in particular owe a  

responsibility for taking care of the well-being and welfare of  

10

Page 11

the children.  In  Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka  

(No.1),  347  US  483, Earl  Warren  C.J.,  speaking  for  the  US  

Supreme  Court,  emphasised  the  right  to  education  in  the  

following terms:-

“Today,  education  is  perhaps  the  most  important  function  of  State  and  local  Governments.  …  It  is  required  in  the  performance  of  our  most  basic  public  responsibilities,  even  service  in  the  armed  forces.  It  is  the  very  foundation  of  good  citizenship. Today it is a principal instrument  in awakening the child to cultural values, in  preparing him for later professional training,  and in helping him to adjust normally to his  environment. In these days, it is doubtful that  any  child  may  reasonably  be  expected  to  succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity  of an education.”

18. In the facts and circumstances of the case, would it be  

proper for the children whose parents have been transferred  

to Delhi from different States of India can be denied admission  

in the schools much less the non-aided schools because of the  

instructions issued by the Government through its Education  

Department.  

11

Page 12

19. Having considered the matter, we deem it appropriate  

to  relieve  the  appellants  from  the  hardship  of  having  the  

admission being granted earlier under Notification dated 18th  

December,  2013 from being taken away by the subsequent  

Notification  dated  27th February,  2014,  issued  in  the  mid-

stream.  In our considered opinion, it was not permissible for  

the  Administration to  alter  the  basis  of  admission  after  the  

admission process had started and further having participated  

in  the  selection  process  the  criteria  for  selection  could  not  

have been questioned by unsuccessful participants.

20. In  the  circumstances,  we  direct  that  the  admissions  

already  granted  to  the  appellants’  children  shall  not  be  

disturbed  on  the  basis  of  impugned  Notification  dated  27th  

February, 2014 deleting points for Inter State Transfer.   These  

children shall continue their study in those schools where they  

got admitted or selected for admission.

21. In  course  of  argument,  Mr.  Gupta,  learned  senior  

counsel  appearing for  the appellants,  furnished a list  of  22  

parents  having  24  candidates  belonging  to  Inter-State  

12

Page 13

Transfer  category,  who  are  successful  under  Notification  

dated  18th December,  2013.   Learned  senior  counsel  

submitted  that  these  candidates  are  also  entitled  to  get  

admission  and  continue  study  in  those  schools.  Mr.  Raju  

Ramachandran,  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  Delhi  

Administration, fairly submitted that these 24 candidates shall  

also be accommodated in the schools.  Therefore,  we direct  

that  these  24  candidates  shall  get  admission,  if  not  at  all  

admitted,  being  the  successful  candidates  under  the  Inter-

State  Transfer  category  under  Notification  dated  18th  

December,  2013.   It  goes  without  saying  that  the  

Administration  shall  take  steps  to  accommodate  these  

students in various schools within its jurisdiction by increasing  

the number of seats in such schools.   However,  it  is  made  

clear that this order would only enure to the benefit of those  

who had approached the Court.  It would certainly not extend  

the benefit  to  those who had not  approached the Court  or  

might have gone in slumber.

13

Page 14

22.  With the aforesaid directions and observations, these  

civil appeals are disposed of.  Consequently, the writ petitions  

and  the  appeals  pending  in  Delhi  High  Court  also  stand  

disposed of.

………………………….J. (H.L. Dattu)

………………………….J. (M.Y. Eqbal)

………………………….J. (S.A. Bobde)

New Delhi, May 07, 2014.

14