LexENVIRONMENT & CONSUMER PROTECTION FOUNDATION versus DELHI ADMINISTRATION & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012) 8 S.C.R. 1060 A ENVIRONMENT & CONSUMER PROTECTION B FOUNDATION v. DELHI ADMINISTRATION & ORS. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 631 of 2004) OCTOBER 3, 2012 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] EDUCATION: C Schools - Infrastructure facilities - Held: States directed to give effect to various directions already issued by the Court for providing toilet facilities for boys and girls, drinking water facilities, sufficient classrooms, appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff etc. - The directions are applicable to D all schools: i.e. Government, aided, unaided, minority and non minority schools - Further, the statutory authorities uls. 31 of RTE Act will examine and review the safeguards for the child's right and recommend measures for their effective implementation - Right of Children to Free and Compulsory E Education Act, 2009 - s.31 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Arts.21A and 32. The petitioner, a registered Charitable Society, filed the instant writ petition seeking various directions to improve the conditions of Government and aided F schools and schools run by local bodies. The Court by several interim orders directed the States and the Union Territories to provide in the schools basic infrastructure facilities like toilet facility, drinking water, classrooms, appointment of teachers etc. During the pendency of the G writ petition the Right of Children, to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 was enacted by Parliament. In the case of Society for Unaided Private Schools, Rajasthan1, the Supreme Court while upholding 1. (2012) 2 SCR 715. H 1060 ENVIRONMENT & CONSUMER PROTECT. FOUND. v. 1061 DELHI ADMINISTRATION the constitutional validity of the RTE Act gave various A directions to take steps for full implementation of the Act. In compliance with the said directions, some of the States responded by furnishing the details of infrastructure facilities available in the schools in the respective States. The Court gave further directions to provide proper toilet B facilities for boys and girls and drinking water in all the schools. In the subsequent proceedings the Court noticed that some of the States did not fully implement the directions issued in the case of Society for Unaided Private Schools, Rajasthan as well as the provisions of c the RTE Act. Disposing of the writ petition, the Court HELD: 1.1. Section 31 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 has also conferred D certain functions on the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and also on the State Commissions These statutory authorities will also examine and review the safeguards for the child's rights and recommend measures for their effective E implementation. [Para 8] [1070-A-D] 1.2. All the States are directed to give effect to the various directions already given by this Court* like providing toilet facilities for boys and girls, drinking water facilities, sufficient class rooms, appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff etc., if not already provided, within F six months. It is made clear that these directions are applicable to all the schools, whether State owned or privately owned, aided or unaided, minority or non- minority. [para 9] [1071-B-C] G *Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan vs. Union of India and Anr. (2012) 2 SCR 715 = (2012) 6 SCC 1 - referred to H A B 1062 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 8 S.C.R. Case Law Reference: (2012) 2 SCR 715 referred to para 2 CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No. 631 of 2004. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Ravindra Bana, Rono Mohanty for the Appellant. A. Mariarputham, AG, Ashok Bhan, T.S. Doabia, Manjit C Singh, Dr. Manish Singhvi, Anil Grover, AAGs, Sunita Sharma, Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Sushma Suri, W.A. Qadri, A. Deb Kumar, Purnima Bhatt, Zaid Ali, B.V. Balramdas, D.S. Mahra, Khwairakpam Nobin Singh, Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Anil Shrivastav, Ritu Raj Biswas, K.N. Madhusoodhanan, M.T. D George, Vivekta Singh, Tarjit Singh, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Hemantika Wahi, Nandini Gupta, Genefer B., G.N. Reddy, M. Rambabu, S. Nagarajan, Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha, Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Sanjay Kharde, Asha Gopalan Nair, V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotle, Prabu Ramasubramanian, lrshad E Ahmad, C.D. Singh, Abhimanyu Singh, Ranjan Mukherjee, S. Bhowmick, S.C. Ghosh, Sunil Fernandes, Vernika Tamar, Astha Sharma, R. Sharma (for Corporat
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.