Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Poulomi Pavini Shukla vs Union Of India on 6 August, 2025
ITEM NO.27 COURT NO.4 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
WRIT PETITION(S)(CIVIL) NO(S).503/2018
POULOMI PAVINI SHUKLA PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
(IA NO. 142314/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
IA NO. 22089/2020 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
IA NO. 66125/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT
IA NO. 75988/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA NO. 143419/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA NO. 64218/2021 - GRANT OF INTERIM RELIEF)
Date : 06-08-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) : Petitioner-in-person
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G.
Mr. Chinmayee Chandra, Adv.
Mr. Parthiv Goswami, Adv.
Mr. Vvv Pattabhiram, Adv.
Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR
Mr. Sahil Bhalaik, AOR
Mr. Tushar Giri, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Anil Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Ritik Arora, Adv.
Mr. Shivam Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Gouttam Polanki, Adv.
Mr. Murshlin Ansari, Adv.
Ms. Eliza Barr, Adv.
Ms. Disha Singh, AOR
Mr. Manish Kumar, AOR
Mr. Divyansh Mishra, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Ms. Ankita Sharma, AOR
Digitally signed by
BORRA LM VALLI
Date: 2025.08.08
14:23:09 IST
Reason: Mr. Arjun D Singh, Adv.
Ms. Ishika Neogi, Adv.
1
Mr. Surjendu Sankar Das, AOR
Ms. Aarushi Singh, Adv.
Mr. P K Bajaj, Adv.
Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR
Mr. Satyalipsu Ray, Adv.
Ms. Priyal Sheth, Adv.
Mr. Shekhar Raj Sharma, A.A.G.
Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR
Ms. Nidhi Narwal, Adv.
Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv.
Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Gaj Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ramendra Nath Makhal, Adv.
Mr. T. V. Surendranath, Adv.
Mr. Vaibhav Vikram Singh, Adv.
Mr. Shantanu Sagar, AOR
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
Mrs. Divya Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Manoneet Dwivedi, Adv.
Mr. Prakash Kumarmangalam, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Kumar Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Niharika Rai, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Chadha, A.A.G.
Mr. Sanchit Garga, AOR
Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR
Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv.
Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.
Mrs. Devika A.l., Adv.
Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR
Mr. Sarthak Raizada- G.a., Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Chhavi Khandelwal, Adv.
Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR
Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR
Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Anupama Ngangom,,, Adv.
Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv.
2
Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR
Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv.
Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv.
Mr. Som Raj Choudhury, AOR
Ms. Shrutee Aradhana, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Karan Sharma, AOR
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, AOR
Ms. Ripul Swati Kumari, Adv.
Mr. Krishna Rastogi, Adv.
Ms. G. Indira, AOR
Mr. P Gandepan, Adv.
Ms. Amrita Kumari, Adv.
Ms. Anjali Singh, Adv.
Ms. Raniba Pangnila, Adv.
Mr. Sravan Kumar Karanam, AOR
Ms. M. Harshini, Adv.
Mr. Kumar Abhishek, Adv.
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Rohit K. Singh, AOR
Mr. Divyanshu Sahay, Adv.
Mr. Pritam Bishwas, Adv.
Mr. Akshat Kumar, AOR
Ms. Anubha Dhulia, Adv.
Mr. Kunal Vajani, Adv.
Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR
Mr. Abhinav Rana, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Verma, Adv.
Mr. Krishnakant Dubey, Adv.
3
Mr. Tadimalla Bhaskar Gowtham, Adv.
Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR
Mr. Aravindh S., AOR
Ms. Jyoti P, Adv.
Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR
Mr. T.K.Nayak, Adv.
Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Nidhi Jaswal, AOR
Mr. Shalini Singh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
We have heard Ms.Poulomi Pavini Shukla-petitioner, who has appeared in-person, and learned counsel for the respondent(s) including the respondent(s)-States.
2. The petitioner, who is a practising Advocate, has filed this Writ Petition invoking Article 32 of the Constitution of India as a Public Interest Litigation in order to bring to the notice of this Court the vulnerable sections of the children namely the ‘orphans’, who have no parents and who are in need of care and protection.
3. The petitioner submitted that although there may be several schemes and programmes envisaged by the Central and the State Governments for the protection and care of the orphans, nevertheless the same are inadequate. Thus the emphasis and focus on this petition is to ensure that ultimately the orphan children are not left in the lurch in this Country.
44. The petitioner has sought the following reliefs in this Writ Petition:
“(a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction of this Hon’ble Court directing:
1. Government of India to provide ‘orphans’ who have no family support or linkages in society of any kind with the right to reservation in Government jobs and educational institutions.
2. Government of India to provide for orphans and children in Need for Care and Protection all such benefits besides reservation in educational institutions and in jobs, like scholarships, tuition support, coaching for competitive examinations, fellowships, hostels/stay facilities for post matriculate/intermediate studies, bank loans, cash incentives for setting up businesses and other benefits being currently given by the Ministry of Social Justice to children of SC/ST and OBC parents.
3. Government of India to have a policy for assigning religion to orphans and ensure that orphan children are given the right to choose their religion upon attaining majority and are not under duress of any kind to choose a specific religion.
4. Government of India to have a policy for assigning caste to orphans and ensure that orphan children are given the right to choose their caste after their choice of religion and also an appropriate name in consonance with the religion and caste which they have chosen.
5. Government of India conduct a comprehensive census or sample survey of Children in Need of Care and Protection which is essential to fix the numbers and targets and outlays in Government schemes as well as outline the extent of the problem.5
6. Government of India to constitute an expert group of NITI Aayog or a Committee or Commission like the Mandal Commission for OBCs with public participation to examine all aspects of the ‘Orphan and Children in Need of Care and Protection’ problem and suggest solutions.
7. Government of India and the NITI Aayog to act on the thinking expressed in the Government of India National Health Policy – that the finances of the State are inelastic – so Child Protection for which the Centre has placed primary financial responsibility on the States and because of which there has been a serious paucity of resources and support mechanisms, has to be taken up for Central funding on a primary responsibility basis.
Government should transfer ‘Child Protection’ back as a Central item with primary responsibility of the Centre for funding schemes for ‘Orphans’ and Child Protection.
8. Government of India to ensure a uniformity in schemes and in implementation of schemes for Child Protection across the country because all ‘Children in Need of Care and Protection’ in India- wherever they are found-have equal rights on the State as ‘parens patriae’ and there cannot be a difference on locational basis in the facilities and opportunities being given by the Republic of India to this category of its citizens. The responsibility of implementation of schemes for Child Protection can remain with the States but uniform welfare measures have to be enunciated and ensured by the Centre.
9. Government of India to consider the repeal of The Orphanages and Other Charitable Homes (Supervision and Control( Act, 1960 because of the 6 dichotomy of instructions between this Act and the JJ Act 2015 regrading registration of orphanages, creating undue confusion.
10. Government of India to consider amending and bifurcating the JJ Act 2015 so that legislation for Children in need of Care and Protection should not be an add-on to the legislation for Juvenile Justice because the parameters are significantly different. Indian society has to own up its responsibility to Children in Need of Care and Protection as a separate stand-alone enactment.
11. Government of India to substantially enhance the budgetary allocation for Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS), National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development (NIPCCD), National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) and Child line with objectives and targets clearly specified to ensure a comprehensive coverage of all ‘Children in Need of Care and Protection’ within a specified timeline.
12. Government of India to instruct National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development (NIPCCD) to immediately create a cell for Children in Need of Care and Protection and initiate studies in (among others);
a. Suicide rates among orphans leaving Children Homes.
b. Percentage of children ending up in jail within 5 years of leaving Children Homes.
c. Higher education possibilities and programs for orphans leaving Children Homes.
d. Numbers of children in Children Homes completing various levels of primary and 7 secondary education.
e. Numbers completing Graduation and numbers completing any professional degree (B.Tech., M.B.B.S etc).
f. Nature of jobs/professions being
taken up by orphans.
13. Government of India to ensure that there should be at least one orphanage or Children Home for each, boys and girls, in every district directly under the District Collector and to put in place systems for participation of Public Representatives in the local administrative decisions of Government Orphanages and also for accepting donations from civil society. Ideally, there should be at least 5 orphanages or Children Homes in each district;
a. For children of the age 0 to 10 years b. For boys of the age 11 to 17 years c. For girls of the age 11 to 17 years d. For boys of the age 18 to 22 years e. for girls of the age 18 to 22 years
14. Government of India to ensure that the provisions of education in good, private schools included in the Right to Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) currently being made available for children of below-poverty- line parents, are extended to orphans of registered institutions.
15. Government of India to modfy the 18 year age cut-off in State support to ‘orphans’ and, as the Government of India provides support and schemes extensively for children of OBC and SC/ST parents beyond 18 years of age, namely tuition, fellowships, coaching, bank loans, micro finance and seed capital, Government of India should strengthen provisions in a similar manner for support to 8 children aging out of Children Homes to provide them similar support for higher education and earning opportunities, till they attain an age of self- sufficiency (of say, 22 years).
16. Government of India to address the issue of stigmatization and discrimination of ‘orphan’ and children in the streets through public sensitization.
17. Government of India to associate Public Representatives and Civil Society and with existing Orphanages and Children Care Houses in a structured manner.
18. Government of India to earmark 1% to the total funds under MPLADS and MLALADS Discretionary Allotments for Members of Parliament and Members of State Legislatures for ‘orphans’ and ‘Children in need of Care and Protection’. This will make Public Representatives interact with this class of citizens in routine and this attention should emerge as a paradigm changing focus.
19. Government of India be directed to announce an orphan Day (suggestion January 1 – New Year’s Day) and press the United National for it to be recognized as the International Orphan Day to focus the attention of civil society, business houses in CSR, educational institutions etcetera on ‘orphans’.”
5. In this regard, while drawing our attention to the prayers sought for by her, she pointed out that under Section 2(1)(d) of the Right Of Children to Free And Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for brevity, “the Act”), the definition of ‘Child’ ought to also include an orphan child as such a child may be socially, culturally, 9 economically and gender-wise, a disadvantaged child. She submitted that the expression, “Or such other factor” can also include that section of the Children who are orphans and who may not be having any guardian or other person to take care of them. Such orphans may also be in orphanages or even without any other protective institution to take care of them. It was her contention that the first and foremost need of such orphan children is to have free and compulsory education in terms of the Act. In this regard, she drew our attention to Section 3 and also to section 12(1)(C) of the Act.
6. Section 3 envisages free and compulsory education for Children from the age of 6 to 14 years. This is in line with Article 21A of the Constitution of India which has recognized the Right to Education as a Fundamental Right and also Article 51A(k) of the Constitution of India, wherein it has been recognized as a Fundamental Duty of the parents, but in the absence of orphans having parents it becomes the duty of the State to act as ‘parens patriae’ to ensure that such children are not denied the Right to Free Education under the provisions of this Act.
7. Therefore, the submission of the petitioner was that under Section 3 read with Section 12 (1)(c) of the Act, the right of the orphans to be admitted to a neighbourhood school within the 25% quota may be recognized. For immediate reference, we extract section 12 as under:
“12. Extent of school's responsibility for free and 10 compulsory education. -
1)For the purposes of this Act, a school,-
(a)specified in sub-clause (i) of clause (n) of section 2 shall provide free and compulsory elementary education to all children admitted therein;
(b)specified in sub-clause (ii) of clause (n) of section 2 shall provide free and compulsory elementary education to such proportion of children admitted therein as its annual recurring aid or grants so received bears to its annual recurring expenses, subject to a minimum of twenty-five per cent.;
(c)specified in sub-clauses (iii) and (iv) of clause
(n) of section 2 shall admit in class I, to the extent of at least twenty-five 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 education 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. (2)The school specified in sub-clause (iv) of clause (n) of section 2 providing free and compulsory elementary education as specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall be reimbursed expenditure so incurred by it to the extent of per-child-expenditure incurred by the State, or the actual amount charged from the child, whichever is less, in such manner as may be prescribed:Provided that such reimbursement shall not exceed per-child-expenditure incurred by a school specified in sub-clause (i) of clause (n) of section 2:Provided further that where such school is already under obligation to provide free education to a specified number of children on account of it having received any land, building, equipment or other facilities, either free of cost or at a concessional rate, such school shall not be entitled for reimbursement to the extent of such obligation.
(3)Every school shall provide such information as may be required by the appropriate Government or the local authority, as the case may be.”
8. We find that the submission of the petitioner, who has appeared in-person, requires consideration and we therefore direct the respondent(s)-States/Union Territories to make a survey of the orphan children who have already been granted admission under the above-mentioned provisions 11 of the Act as well as a survey of the children who have been deprived of such Right to Free And Compulsory Education under the Act and if so, for what reasons and submit an affidavit in that regard.
9. It is needless to observe that while the survey and data collection is being done in the above context, a simultaneous effort shall also be made for ensuring that such deserving children (orphans) are admitted in the neighbourhood schools in case they have not yet been done so owing to the singular fact that such children are orphans and may not have had the opportunity of being admitted in the neighbourhood schools under the provisions of the Act.
10. For ascertaining the aforesaid data and also compliance, we grant four weeks’ time.
11. We also take note of the fact that the Governments of the States of Delhi, Gujarat, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Sikkim, Jarkhand, Manipur and Orissa have already issued notifications to include orphan children within the 25% quota to be admitted to neighbourhood schools under the provisions of the Act.
12. The other States to also consider issuing such a notification and take steps to ensure that the aforesaid directions are complied with and file an affidavit in that regard. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from today.
13. In case a notification is issued by any State(s) or 12 Union Territories, then the same may be placed on record.
14. We expect that such a notification would be issued by the other States also, failing which an affidavit as to why such a notification has not been issued shall be filed by the Secretary, Department of Education.
15. List on 09.09.2025.
(B. LAKSHMI MANIKYA VALLI) (DIVYA BABBAR)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
13