logo
Delhi HC to DPS, Dwarka: Using bouncers to block students' entry over fees is ‘mental harassment'

Delhi HC to DPS, Dwarka: Using bouncers to block students' entry over fees is ‘mental harassment'

Time of India2 days ago

New Delhi: Expressing strong disapproval of Delhi Public School, Dwarka's conduct in allegedly deploying bouncers to block students' entry over a fee dispute, Delhi High Court on Thursday termed the act of publicly shaming students for non-payment of fees as "mental harassment".
A single-judge bench of Justice Sachin Datta remarked, "This court is constrained to express its dismay at the alleged conduct of the petitioner school in engaging "bouncers" to physically block the entry of certain students into the school premises. Such a reprehensible practice has no place in an institute of learning. It reflects not only a disregard for the dignity of a child but also a fundamental misunderstanding of a school's role in society.
"
The court was hearing a petition filed by parents of students who had been expelled last month for non-payment of fees. It was informed that the school later withdrew its expulsion orders following a directive from a coordinate bench, reinstating the affected students.
The court emphasised that any form of public shaming or intimidation over financial issues, especially using force or coercive means, constitutes mental harassment and undermines a child's psychological well-being.
"The use of bouncers fosters a climate of fear, humiliation, and exclusion, which is incompatible with the ethos of education," the bench stated.
While noting that the school is entitled to charge reasonable for its operations—to sustain infrastructure, remunerate staff, and provide a conducive learning environment—the court underlined that an educational institution cannot be equated with a commercial enterprise.
"The driving force of a school—especially one managed by a reputed society—must be public welfare, nation-building, and holistic child development, not profit maximisation.
The primary objective of a school is to impart education and inculcate values, not to operate as a business enterprise," the court observed.
As the school had reinstated the students, the court said the petition had become largely moot. However, it directed that any future action under Rule 35 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, must be preceded by proper notice and an opportunity for the affected students or their guardians to respond.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

HC grants relief to candidates
HC grants relief to candidates

Hans India

timean hour ago

  • Hans India

HC grants relief to candidates

New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium 'appeared to be excessive and disproportionate' but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be 'fanciful or imaginative', it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to 'avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations'. 'It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'. The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.

Delhi HC grants relief to CLAT-PG candidates over answer key dispute
Delhi HC grants relief to CLAT-PG candidates over answer key dispute

The Hindu

time2 hours ago

  • The Hindu

Delhi HC grants relief to CLAT-PG candidates over answer key dispute

The Delhi High Court on Friday provided partial relief to candidates who had challenged the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025, citing discrepancies in a few questions. While disposing of three petitions by students seeking rectification of alleged errors in the answer key, the court ruled in favour of the students in two questions and upheld the Consortium of National Law Universities' (NLUs) stance on a third. It directed the Consortium to revise the scoring accordingly and declare the results. The batch of petitions by the students sought directions to the Consortium to rectify alleged errors in the final answer key of the CLAT-PG for the academic year 2024-25 and to re-issue the results after the necessary corrections. Additionally, they challenged the fee of ₹1,000 per question for raising objections to the provisional answer key, terming it excessive, and sought a direction to the Consortium to reconsider this charge. The court highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. The court said its observation would be sufficient for the Consortium to take heed of and take appropriate steps to avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations, scheduled for the following years. 'In our considered opinion, it may be advisable for the Consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (Retd.) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the court said. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'.

Delhi Court Acquits Former Secretary HC Gupta In Coal Scam Case
Delhi Court Acquits Former Secretary HC Gupta In Coal Scam Case

NDTV

time2 hours ago

  • NDTV

Delhi Court Acquits Former Secretary HC Gupta In Coal Scam Case

New Delhi: A Delhi court on Friday acquitted former coal secretary HC Gupta, ex-joint secretary (coal) KS Kropha and then director KC Samaria in a coal scam case related to irregularities in the allocation of Mahugarhi Coal Block in Jharkhand. Today marks Gupta's second acquittal in coal block related cases whereas he has been convicted in five other cases and his appeals are currently pending in Delhi High Court. The CBI has also challenged his acquittal in the first case. There were total 19 cases filed by the CBI against Gupta, of which 12 are pending before trial courts. Special Judge Sanjay Bansal while pronouncing the verdict on Friday convicted JAS Infrastructure Capital Ltd and its then director Manoj Kumar Jayaswal for cheating and criminal conspiracy in securing coal block's allocation. The judge would hear arguments on sentencing on July 8. A total of 29 corruption cases filed by the CBI are currently pending before two special courts set up to try cases arising out of coal scam whereas 27 cases have been disposed of so far. On January 16, the Enforcement Directorate informed the top court that 45 complaints (ED's equivalent to a chargesheet), including supplementary ones, were pending under the PMLA. The top court in 2014 quashed 214 coal blocks allocated by the Centre between 1993 and 2010 after taking note of two PILs and had ordered a trial by a special CBI Judge. It later increased the number of the courts to two to try the scam-related cases. The CBI was represented by special public prosecutor R S Cheema, additional legal advisor Sanjay Kumar and public prosecutors A P Singh and N P Srivastava in the case. The CBI lodged the case on the reference of Central Vigilance Commission against officials of Ministry of Coal for alleged corruption in the matter of allocation of coal blocks to the private companies during period 2006-09. It was alleged in the FIR that JAS Infrastructure Capital Pvt Ltd and its Director Jayaswal had misrepresented/concealed facts in the application form in order to qualify and obtain wrongful gains/undue benefits in allocation of Mahuagarhi coal block. The CBI spokesperson in a statement on Friday said, "This is the 19th conviction in coal block allocation cases investigated by CBI. Initially, the CBI had filed final report (closure) in the case on November 20, 2014." The special court had previously taken cognisance and framed charges against JAS Infrastructure Capital Pvt Ltd, Manoj Kumar Jayaswal, H C Gupta, K S Kropha and K C Samaria. "The allegations in the case were that the accused private persons, namely the promoters of JAS Infrastructure Capital Pvt. Ltd, had made false and misleading claims regarding the financial net worth of the company," the CBI said. They further misrepresented the appraisal and syndication of debt by financial institutions, with a view to securing the wrongful allocation of a coal block, the CBI spokesperson said. The company, it was alleged, "deliberately concealed" material facts concerning the previous allocation of coal blocks to other group or associate companies in the application and feedback forms. "The company had also dishonestly projected the net worth of unrelated third-party companies- Inertia Iron & Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. and IL&FS- as its own, both in its application and during the presentation made before the Screening Committee for the allocation of Mahugarhi Coal Block," the statement said. The CBI examined 18 prosecution witnesses in support of its case.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store