Gujarat High Court
Sandip Harshadray Munjyasara vs State Of Gujarat & 1....Opponent(S) on 20 April, 2017
Author: R. Subhash Reddy
Bench: R.Subhash Reddy, Vipul M. Pancholi
C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 60 of 2017
==========================================================
SANDIP HARSHADRAY MUNJYASARA....Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Opponent(s) ========================================================== Appearance:
PARTY-IN-PERSON, PERSONAL CAPACITY for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS MANISHA SHAH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s) No. 1 - 2 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI Date : 20/04/2017 CAV ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI)
1. This Writ Petition is filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation espousing the public cause wherein the petitioner has sought changes to the Algorithm / Program / Logic / Source Code of the Web Portal so that the Portal can detect and identify the actual eligible schools which should appear in the list of eligible schools within the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms. in relation to the students residential address. The petitioner has further sought direction against the respondent authorities to declare the total number of seats filledin by the schools in the previous year and the Page 1 of 14 HC-NIC Page 1 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER available number of seats to be filledin during this year with each registered schools on the Web Portal.
It is also prayed that a High Level Committee be constituted, including the Forensic, Technical and Legal Experts to carry out forensic investigation on the Web Portal and to submit a report of the same before this Court.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that as per Section 12(1)(c) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2009" for short], a school specified in subclauses (iii) and (iv) of Section2(n) of the Act shall admit in Standard1 to the extent of at least 25% of the strength of that class children belonging to the weaker sections and disadvantaged group in the neighborhood and provide free and compulsory elementary education till its completion. It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter, the Government issued the Resolution dated 23.05.2013 for the purpose of grant of admission under the Act of 2009. Under Clause 4 of the said Resolution, admission procedure for free seats is prescribed. Clause 4(KH) provides that the total number of seats at the entry level or any other classes must not be less than the total number of seats in the school.
3. As per the case of the petitioner, the respondents have released the schedule of Online 25% admission policy 20172018. When the petitioner has personally visited the Web Portal, he found out Page 2 of 14 HC-NIC Page 2 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER deceptive data base on the URL :
www.rtegujarat.org/home/schoollist. The petitioner, therefore, made representation to the respondent no.2 on 21.02.2017. It is stated that the second column, namely, the Standard1 strength and 25% of Standard1 strength were removed from the Web Page of the Web Portal just to hide the previous mistake. The petitioner therefore, once again made representation on 02.03.2017 to the respondents.
4. The further grievance of the petitioner is that during the process of fillingup the Online Application Form, the Web Portal could not locate the address of the applicant properly in the Google Maps [Entry through Option 1] as a result of which the Web Portal could not detect and identify the actual / proper eligible schools which come in the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms. as per the address of the applicant. It is stated that the process of Online admission was started on 21.02.2017. However, subsequently, the respondent no.2 has added Option No.2. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after Option No.2 is added, the Web Portal could not detect and identify the actual / eligible schools, which come within the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms as the case may be from the address of the petitioner.
5. It is further stated in the petition that even the applicant cannot give and / or change the priority of the school during the school selection process Page 3 of 14 HC-NIC Page 3 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER and / or before confirmation of form submission. It is thereafter pleaded that the Government has issued another Resolution dated 04.03.2017 whereby, it is decided that admission can be given to General category children if seats remain vacant.
6. Heard the petitioner appearing as partyinperson and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
7. The petitioner mainly contended that the respondents have misinterpreted the provisions contained in Section 12(1)(c) of the Act of 2009 by allowing the strength of entry level classes arbitrarily for many registered schools. It is further contended that the respondents have also failed to consider the admission procedure prescribed in Clause 4 of the Resolution dated 23.05.2013 as well as the provision contained in Clause 4(KH) of the said Government Resolution. The details of total seats and number of of seats available at free of cost for each school has been intentionally not provided and not shown on the Web Portal and thereby, the respondents have violated the provisions contained in Clause 4(K) and 4(KH) of the Resolution dated 23.05.2013. It is further contended that the school which actually appears in the list of eligible schools within the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms. is appearing in the list of eligible schools within the radius of 01 - 03 Kms. and viceversa. The school which wrongly appears in the list of eligible schools within 01 - 03 Kms is, in fact, close to the Page 4 of 14 HC-NIC Page 4 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER applicants' residence and therefore, the same school is selected by the petitioner in spite of the fact that during the selection process the Web Portal will give priority to other schools which were also selected from the list of eligible schools within 01 Km. It is, therefore, contended that the respondents have violated the provisions contained in Clauses 2(J) (1), 2(J)(2) and 2(J)(3) of the Resolution dated 23.05.2013. It is further pleaded that there are number of cases where the Web Portal has located wrong address of children or the Web Portal has detected and identified wrong list of eligible schools. The petitioner has referred to some of the examples mentioned in the further affidavit filed by him in respect of the said contention. The petitioner has further submitted that service of Google Map is used by the respondents to pinpoint locations but, in fact, the Google Map is not Government authorized agency as well as if any location which is not mapped (registered) into the Google Map, then it is impossible for Google Map to locate such address. Hence, while fillingup the Online admission form, if the Google Map could not locate the address of the student/s, in such situation, the Web Portal has considered the building of Municipal Corporation as the students home depending upon the District. Thus, it is submitted that once the student's address is located incorrectly, then it is impossible for the Web Portal to display the schools in the closest proximity. Therefore, it is violative of the provisions contained in the Government Resolution Page 5 of 14 HC-NIC Page 5 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER dated 23.05.2013. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed that necessary direction be issued to the respondentauthorities and the reliefs as prayed for be granted.
8. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader Ms. Manisha Shah referred to the relevant provisions contained in the Act of 2009 and referred to the Government Resolution dated 23.05.2013. It is submitted that the said Resolution provides for the admission procedure for free seats on general terms and conditions and require the documents for the enrollment of free seats. It is submitted that the State Government reimburses the schools to the extent of actual fees or a sum of Rs.10000/, whichever is less, with an addition of Rs.3000/ towards the uniforms, school Kits, books, etc., to be paid to the parents. Annual budgetary allocations are made as regards the number of seats to be admitted under the Act of 2009. Thus, the State Government has set the target of granting admission to 60,000 students under the Act of 2009. Last year, i.e. for the year 2016 2017, 46,000 students were granted admission. As per the prescribed procedure, 8,637 nongrant in aid private secondary schools registered with the respondentauthorities were identified and data of the same was sent to the District Information of School Education. Such primary schools are affiliated to various Boards. The data furnished by each of such primary schools are forwarded to the Ministry of Human Resources Development.
Page 6 of 14
HC-NIC Page 6 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017
C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER
9. Learned GP would further submit that on 20.02.2017 an advertisement was published in the daily newspaper calling upon the interested students in seeking admission under the Act of 2009 to fillup their forms Online. At this stage, it is pointed out that for the first time this option was given to the students to fill up their residential details to enable the Google server to pinpoint their locations. It is submitted that once the student's application is mapped, it would enable them to view the schools in the closest proximity, i.e. within the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms. Once the location has been pinpointed, the schools in the vicinity of the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms. would also be visible. It is submitted that for the purpose of enabling the students and their parents to map the locations, assistance was taken of the Google Mapping system, which reveals the latitude and longitude positions. Assistance was also taken from Microsoft Sequel Server.
10. Learned GP thereafter contended that the respondents received the representation dated 21.02.2017 made by the petitioner alleging that the data reflected on the Web Portal is deceptive and incorrect. The respondentauthority has, therefore, immediately addressed to all the District Education Officers (DEO) to physically verify the data submitted by such schools to ensure that there was no discrepancy as regards the data displayed in the Web Page 7 of 14 HC-NIC Page 7 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER Portal and actual number of students are admitted in the classes. In the meantime, the second Web column
(i) relating to students admitted in the previous year and (ii) relating to the number of seats available, was blocked for a short period while physical verification of the data submitted was being carried out. After receipt of the verification letters from the DEOs, on 15.03.2017, both the columns which were blocked in the Website were restored. It is submitted that based on the details, all 8637 schools registered and displayed on the Website, a total of 1,25,384 applications were received out of which 80,957 were approved by the DEO/DPEO. At this stage, learned GP has pointed out that in order to facilitate those parents who are unable to fill up the forms Online as well as to ensure that necessary procedure is followed as prescribed on the Website, 490 Receiving Centers have been set up this year.
11. It is further submitted by the learned GP that the petitioner made another representation dated 02.03.2017 which was received by the respondent authorities in which the petitioner contended that despite filling in the answer data with regard to the place of residence, the Google Mapping location is not properly traceable. The respondent authority therefore immediately modified the Website and included the second option. The second option enables students desirous of filling up the forms also to map the location on Google Maps and paste in the box mentioned as option no.2. At this stage, it is further clarified Page 8 of 14 HC-NIC Page 8 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER that the Online admission is not the only mode in which the parents seek admission of their wards but, forms have also been accepted at the various Receiving Centers. It is further submitted that when the respondent authorities have verified the data supplied by the District Primary Education Officers with regard to the admission given in StandardI last year, the respondent authority has considered the said data by giving admission to the extent of 25% students in Standard1. Thus, no irregularities has been committed by the respondents. Learned GP from the data produced along with the affidavit in reply pointed out that there are more than 1229 schools in which last year 1 to 10 students were admitted in Standard1. Thus, on the basis of the said data, the respondent authorities cannot give admission to the extent of 25% of the total strength of such classes. Thus, the respondents have not committed any illegality as alleged by the petitioner. It is, therefore, submitted that this petition be dismissed.
12. We have considered the submissions canvassed by the petitioner and also the learned GP appearing on behalf of the respondents. It has emerged from the record that this year the respondents have started the process of giving admission to 25% of the students as per the provisions of the Act of 2009. This year Online process is started by the respondents for the first time and when the petitioner has personally visited the Web Portal, he found deceptive data base in it. Another grievance of the petitioner is that Page 9 of 14 HC-NIC Page 9 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER during the process of filling up the Online application form, the Web Portal could not locate his address properly in the Google Maps as a result of which the Web Portal could not detect and identify the actual school, which comes within the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms. as per the address of the petitioner.
13. Section 12(1)(c) of the Act of 2009 provides as under;
"12. Extent of school's responsibility for free and compulsory education. (1) For the purposes of this Act, a school,
(a) ...
(b) ...
(c) specified in subclauses (iii) and (iv) of clause (n) of section 2 shall admit in classI, to the extent of at least twentyfive per cent of the strength of that class, children belonging to weaker section and disadvantaged group in the neighbourhood and provide free and compulsory elementary eduction till its completion:
Provided further that where a school specified in clause (n) of section 2 imparts pre school education, the provisions of clauses (a) to (c) shall apply for admission to such pre school education."
14. Clauses 2(J)(1), 2(J)(2) and 2(J)(3) of the Government Resolution dated 23.05.2013 reads as under;
"(1) Neighboring area of school : In the regard to children, neighboring area means, it could be walking distance of 01 Km.
(2) When sufficient students are not available Page 10 of 14 HC-NIC Page 10 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER in 01 Km, then 03 Km school within 03 Km.
(3) If students are not enough in 03 Km, then school within 06 Km.
15. Clauses 4 - (K) & (KH) of the Government Resolution dated 23.05.2013 reads as under;
"(K) School will Keep the information in the prescribed format of form (enclosed herewith according to AnnexureI) total seats mentioned in the notice board, no. of seats available at free of cost at the time of enrollment, last date for the submission of application for the seats available at free of cost at the time of enrollment, eligible candidate for the draw, display date for notice board, draw data, declaration date of to be enrolled children, declaration date of waiting list, date to pay fees, last date for admission, etc. will be appear on the notice board and information related to it will be represent to the district primary education officer / district education officer before starting the enrollment program.
(KH) The total number of seats at entry level or any of the other classes must be not less than the total number of seats in school."
16. From the provisions made in the Government Resolution dated 23.05.2013, it is clear that the said Resolution provides for the admission procedure for free seats on general terms and conditions. The State Government reimburses the schools to the extent of actual fees or a sum of Rs.10,000/, whichever is less. The annual budgetary allocation is also made by the State Government with regard to the total number of students to be admitted under the Act of 2009. This Page 11 of 14 HC-NIC Page 11 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER year, the State Government has set the target of granting admission to 60,000 students under the aforesaid provisions. From the record, it is further clear that there are 8637 Nongrant in aid private secondary schools registered with the respondent authorities, which were identified and the data of the same was sent to the District Information of School Education. From the affidavit in reply filed by the respondentauthority, it is further clear that on 20.02.2017 an advertisement was published in the daily newspaper calling upon the interested students in seeking admission under the Act of 2009 to fillup their forms Online. Initially, option was given to the students to fill up their residential details to enable the Google server to pinpoint their location. Once the students application is mapped, it would enable them to view the school's location in the closest proximity. Once the location is pinpointed, the schools in the closest proximity falling within the radius of 01 Km, 01 - 03 Kms. and 03 - 06 Kms would also be visible. For such purpose, the respondentauthority has taken assistance of Google mapping system as well as Microsoft sequel server.
17. After the representation was received from the petitioner, the respondentauthority has also added the second option. It is further revealed that total 1,25,384 applications were received this year. It is further revealed that the respondentauthorities have set up 490 Receiving Centers in order to facilitate the parents who are unable to fillup the forms Online Page 12 of 14 HC-NIC Page 12 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017 C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER as well as to ensure that necessary procedure is followed as prescribed on the website. The submission of the petitioner that though only 05 students were admitted in Standard1 last year in a particular school but, if the strength of the said Standard is 60 students, then the respondentauthority is required to allot 25% students of the strength, i.e. 15 students. The aforesaid submission is misconceived inasmuch as if only 05 students had taKen admission in Standard1 last year no direction can be given to the authority to allot 15 students to such school. It is specifically contended by the learned GP that when the respondentauthorities have verified the data sent by the DEO with regard to the admission given in Standard1 last year, the respondentauthority has considered the said data by giving admission to the extent of 25% in Standard1. Thus, we are of the view that the respondents have not committed any irregularity as alleged by the petitioner.
18. We are of the opinion that if any parents are facing any difficulty with regard to fillingup of the forms or any assistance is required, they can approach any of the 490 Receiving Centers set up by the respondent authorities.
19. We are sure that as and when such parents approach the respondentauthorities through such Receiving Centers, then their grievances would be redressed.
Page 13 of 14
HC-NIC Page 13 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017
C/WPPIL/60/2017 CAV ORDER
20. In view of the aforesaid, no direction is required to be issued to the respondentauthorities. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
(R. SUBHASH REDDY, CJ) (VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.) Pravin Page 14 of 14 HC-NIC Page 14 of 14 Created On Fri Apr 21 02:23:58 IST 2017