The website contains all the orders and judgements passed by the Court of the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Delhi starting March 2017.
Showing posts with label Inclusive Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Inclusive Education. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 1, 2020
Thursday, December 19, 2019
Shailja Sharma Vs. The Principal, Air Force Golden Jubilee Institute & Anr. | Case No. 1029/1032/2019/07/8898-8900 | Dated:18.12.2019
In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities National Capital Territory of Delhi 25- D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi Phone-011-23216002-04, Telefax: 011-23216005,
Email: comdis.delhi@nic.in
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016]
Case No. 1029/1032/2019/07/8898-8900 Dated:18.12.2019
In the matter of:
Ms. Shailja Sharma,
Email: shailja2506@gmail.com ......... Complainant
The Principal,
Air Force Golden Jubilee Institute,
Suborto Park,
New Delhi-110010.
The Director,
Directorate of Education,
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Old Sectt., Delhi-110054 ........... Respondent No.2
Date of Last Hearing 12.12.2019
Present:
Ms. Shailja Sharma, complainant.
Ms. Ruchita Karthikeyan, Admn. Officer and
Sh. A. K. Shukla for respondent No. 1.
Dr. Mukesh Chand, DDE(IEB), and Dr. Ajay K. Singh State Coordinator for respondent No.2.
ORDER
The above named complainant, mother of Master Satvik, a child with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) vide her email dated 15.07.2019 addressed to Ms. Poonam S Rampal, Principal of Air Force Golden Jubilee Institute, Subroto Park, New Delhi with copy to this Court, pointed out that she has been requesting for sports, arts, music and computer teacher for children of Special Wing, which has to be provided as per Section 16 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (the Act). She also pointed out that a substitute computer teacher who is technically a speech therapist does not serve the purpose, which is not being done in case of children without disability. She requested for maintaining inclusiveness in the school.
2. The matter was taken up with the respondent No.1 for her comments with direction to ensure that the sports facilities etc. as mandated in Section 16 of the Act were provided to Master Satvik and other children with disabilities on equal basis with others vide letter dated 18.07.2019.
3. Ms. Poonam S. Rampal, Principal, Air Force Golden Jubliee Institute vide her letter dated 05.08.2019 submitted as under:
“Sub: DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CWSN AND NORMAL CHILDREN.
1. Refer your mail date 1029.1032/2019/07/3588 dated 18 Jul 2019.
2. The following is submitted for your kind consideration:
Sports Teacher : Special Wing – Students of Special Wing participated in number of sports activities like bouche, skating and cycling etc. They participate in sports event held during Annual Sports Day along with General Wing students. Also they have participated in Special Olympics and have brought laurels to school.
Dance & Music : There are Special Educators who are competent in imparting dance and music education to students. They teach and make them perform on various occasions like class/school assemblies, inter-house competitions, inter-school competitions, all festivals like Holi, Diwali, Lohri, Eid, Janamashtmi, Christman, Independence Day etc. Students present a full fledged cultural event along with General Wing students during Annual Day of the school every year.
Computer classes : These are taken by Special Educators / Therapists who have computer knowledge and qualifications.
3. It may be noted that as the teacher student ratio is 1:10 for Special Wing, the Special Educators when recruited are looked for additional qualifications at time of recruitment only so that they can impart multiple disciplines along with routine Special Educator’s role.
4. School follows pattern of inclusive education. Every year few Special Wing students are integrated into General Wing and there have been instances where in students have passed out from General Wing – Secondary / Senior Secondary classes inspite of having admitted in Special Wing in their initial stages.
5. Interest of Special Wing students is of prime importance to our school. It is ensured that these students participate in activities along with General Wing students and interact with them as a regular basis.
6. School has a club by name of ‘Club for Cause’ where in students of Senior and Primary Wing interact with Special Wing students on a regular basis and conduct activities with them like paper bag making, art, painting, music and dance etc.
7. During all school event SUPW teachers of General Wing impart teachings to Special Wing also and make them perform on stage along with General Wing students. Sports teachers of General Wing give training for march-past and saluting to these students and an independent contingent of Special Wing participates in school March past.
8. All efforts are made from school to provide all facilities to the Special Wing students and due support is taken from students, teachers and staff of General Wing.
9. School provides all possible facilities to Special Wing students via available resource and make optimal utilization of same.
10. Submitted.
( Poonam S Rampal )
Principal”
4. In her rejoinder dated 31.08.2019, the complainant questioned the veracity of the reply with regard to sports training under a trained sport teacher. She also pointed out that it was clear from the reply of the respondent No. 1 that the school was following old pattern of ‘integration’ and not ‘inclusion’. Further, only a few children are selected to participate in the competitions and Annual Day functions. Her son, Master Satvik did not participate in Annual Function for seven academic years, which is against Section 16 of the Act. She also questioned the contention of respondent No. 1 that support of mainstream teachers was taken for Special Wing and pointed out that Special Wing was not functioning as per norms. She also enclosed copies of notes between her and the school which indicate that there were no fixed computer and sports teachers for Special Wing.
5. Upon considering the written submissions of the parties, a hearing was held on 01.11.2019. During the hearing, it was mentioned that the school has been sanctioned the CSR funds by Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL). The complainant suggested that the existing resources of the school and the said CSR funds can be used effectively for :
- Sports;
- Computer;
- Extra-curricular activities like music, dance and arts etc.
- Individual Education Plan (IEP) with respect to computer education;
- Assistive devices and use of technology for overall development of children with disabilities; and
- More inclusive activities.
6. Ms. Ruchita Karthikeyan, Admn. Officer and Sh. Amresh Chandra, Head Master of the Special Wing who appeared on behalf of the respondent submitted that the school had employed the necessary teaching staff to take care of the children with disabilities. The Individual Education Plan (IEP) is developed in consultation with the parents and the team. They gave a detailed account of the infrastructure and other resources available in the school and propose to augment the technology based infrastructure with the help of the funds that would be available from IOCL in current financial year. They were ready to involve the parents including Smt. Shailja Sharma for any improvement that can help children of the school in general and children with disabilities in particular.
7. The parties were advised to sit together with other parents and to submit a report to this Court indicating the specific areas where the changes are proposed by 22.11.2019 and the matter was fixed for hearing on 28.11.2019 which was rescheduled on 12.12.2019 on the request of respondent No, 1.
8. Vide email dated 21.11.2019, respondent No. 1 submitted that a meeting was held in the Institute on 13.11.2019 with parents and HM, Special Wing to decide IEP of individual student and following points were discussed in detail:
“(a) Carry forward / dropout goals should be re-evaluated for different methods and or motivation level of child or that goal should be dropped after 02 months in consultation with parents of respective child.
(b) Once smart boards are installed, IEP for smart classes will also be construed in consultation with parents.
(c) Parents submitted that they would pitch in by looking for volunteers / NGOs for imparting skills like computer, yoga, therapies etc. to the students.
(d) The meeting was very fruitful and helped both parents / students and Institute to work together on common platform for betterment and growth of our students.”
9. As the status report of respondent No. 1 dated 21.11.2019 did not address the important issues of sports, computer and music and art teacher for children of Special Wing that the complainant had raised, Department of Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi was impleaded as respondent No. 2 to give necessary inputs in the matter so that the issues were addressed properly.
10. During the hearing on 12.12.2019, complainant reiterated her request and further added that her child should be ensured equality and equity and all the resources that are needed for him as mandated in Section 16 of the Act.
11. Ms. Ruchita Karthikeyan, Admn. Officer and Sh. A.K. Shukla, Speech Therapist who appeared on behalf of respondent No.1 submitted that the children with disabilities of Special Wing have a physical education period of 45 minutes immediately after morning assembly. All Special Educators and Physical Education teachers teach sports activities to children with disabilities of Special Wing alongwith other students. As submitted during the last hearing, the computer training is imparted to children with disabilities in Special Wing by computer trained personnel of Indian Air Force. Further, in compliance with directions of this Court vide RoP dated 1.11.2019 the children with disabilities of Special Wing are being taught music, dance and art by the teachers of regular classes.
12. Dr. Mukesh Chand, DDE (IEB) and Dr. Ajay K. Singh, State Coordinator appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2 and clarified that the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE), 2009 as amended in 2012 and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act) mandate that children with disabilities need to be taught in the regular classes. As per the policy of the Govt. and its circulars, the practice of having a Special Wing for children with disabilities which is being adopted currently, needs to be stopped in a phased manner in consultation with the parents. The resources of Special Wing including the special education teachers, therapists etc. are to be used as resource room / resource centre to bridge the gap of implications of disability in learning of children with disabilities by providing support to the mainstream teachers and buddies (peers). Continuation of Special Wing in a mainstream school for long will thus be against the provisions of the RPwD Act and the RTE Act.
13. They further stated that in order to meet the specific needs of children with disabilities in respective disciplines like music, dance, computer, sports etc. the mainstream teachers must be trained and their capacity be built to enable them to teach children with disabilities on equal basis with other children. Further, the goals for each child with disability have to be set based on his / her potential and adaptability from class 1 to 8 or upto the age of 18 years. The practice of having separate teachers and a separate section amounts to isolation of children with disabilities and is against the inclusive environment which has to be stopped. The IEP of each child with disability must be reviewed in consultation with the parents from time to time. The IEP would also get modified in accordance with the achievement of the goals by the child.
14. The Directorate of Education, Private School Branch, Old Sectt., Delhi vide Order No. F. 16/DDE(IEB)/Admn.Cell/2019/10839-43 dated 28.08.19
has directed the Private Unaided Recognized Schools of Delhi to implement the inclusive education in line with the provisions of the RPwD Act. The said order is reproduced below for better appreciation by respondent No. 1:
“The Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016 was passed by the Parliament of India in the year 2016 and came into force w.e.f. 19.04.2017. The Delhi Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules 2018 came in force w.e.f. 27.12.2018 vide which Section 2(m) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 states that
“Inclusive Education” means a system of education wherein students with and without disability learn together and the system of teaching and learning is suitably adapted to meet the learning needs of different types of students with disabilities.
And Section 16 of the RPwD Act, 2016 provides that the appropriate Government and the local authorities shall endeavour that all educational institutions funded or recognized by them provide inclusive education to the children with disabilities, hence to achieve this, all educational institutions are required to comply & act as per provisions of section 16 of said Act in letter and spirit.
And Section 89 of the RPwD Act, 2016 states that any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this Act, or of any Rule made there under shall for first contravention be punishable with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees and for any subsequent contravention with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to five lakh rupees.
In the larger public interest, Directorate of Education is reiterating the directions issued vide Order No. DE.Act.15/WPC/4618/2012/6961-70 dated 19.02.2013 passed by the Honourable High Court of Delhi in WPC No. 4618/2011 titled as Social Jurist, a Civil Rights Groups Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi whereby the Hon’ble Court directed as under:-
“We accordingly allow this petition and direct all the recognized aided and unaided private schools in Delhi to appoint Special Educators and to make their buildings/school premises barrier free so as to provide free movement/access to children with disabilities. We further direct the DoE, Govt. of NCT of Delhi to ensure compliance of the directions issued by this Court and to take action for de-recognition against the erring school. We however, grant time up to 31st march, 2013 to the said school to, if not have already done, make their school premises barrier free/access free. We have granted the said time having regard to the fact that Section 19 of the RTE Act has given time of three years from 1st April, 2010. We further grant time of two years to appoint Special Educators. However, schools where children with special needs are already admitted or will be admitted hereafter shall immediately make provision for Special Educators and further ordain that no school shall refuse admission to children with disability for the reason of not employing Special Educators or not providing barrier free access in the school premises”.
Despite issuing the above said order, irregularities in admissions of children which is a matter of serious concern with Disabilities Category have come to notice. The matter has also been taken note of by the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Therefore, all the Principals/ Managers of Private Unaided Recognized Schools of Delhi are hereby directed to launch a Special Drive to examine and verify the admission records of academic sessions 2017-18 to 2018-19 and ensure that all admissions under the CWSN Category have been done strictly as per guidelines issued by the Government from time to time in this regard and the students those admitted are provided with effective Inclusive Education in the line of the provisions made in the RTE Act 2009 and above said provisions of the RPwD Act, 2016.
Any lapse in this regard is ground to attract penalty as per the RPwD Act & the DSEAR, 1973.
This is issue with the prior approval of competent authority.
(YOGESH PRATAP)
Deputy Director of Education (PSB)”
15. Vide another order No. F.43/DDE(IEB)/ Admn.Cell/2019/8916 -
8924 dated 22.10.2019 issued by the Director (Education), though meant for Govt. schools of the Directorate of Education, gives guidelines for effective use of the services of Trained Graduate Teacher – Special Education Teachers (TGT-SETs) to facilitate inclusive education to children with disabilities. It also contains an illustrative / sample time-table and Head of Schools (HOS) of all the Govt. Schools have been directed to ensure that TGT-SETs implement the time-table, thus prepared in letter and spirit. Annexure-II of the said order also contains the guidelines for implementation of the time table and work allocation for schools that have more than one TGT-SETs and to ensure distribution of work among TGT-SGTs. The order clearly emphasized full involvement of the Head of Schools / Principals. The sample time-table details the plan of activities, resource room teaching, inclusive class room teaching, co-scholastic activities of children with disabilities, resource room teaching with miscellaneous category teachers, coordination with other teachers, counseling of children with disabilities or peer groups, parental counseling, school club activities from Monday to Saturday. It also gives details of key areas given in the sample time-table. The general guidelines for preparation of time-table and work allocation among the TGT-SETs at Annexure-II is a good resource for guidance of every school whether Govt. or Private.
16. The intent in the RPwD Act, RTE Act Government’s policy of
inclusive education and the schemes for its implementation like Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) / Samagra Shiksha is amply clear that children with disabilities have to be taught together with rest of the children with necessary adaptations and provision of equitable resources. If inclusive education is to be truly implemented, it is not only the special education teachers or special wings but also full involvement and commitment of the Principals of the schools, the Managements and mainstream teachers is essential. It was for this reason that a workshop was organized for Principals and Management Functionaries of private schools on RPwD Act with focus on inclusive education through SCERT, Govt. of NCT of Delhi at Thyagraj Stadium on 09.01.2019. Such workshops need to be organized more often. It has been observed that Special Education Teachers alone are made responsible for education of children with disabilities in most of the mainstream schools which is completely against the spirit of the inclusive education and biggest stumbling block to achieve the objective of inclusion.
17. As per my observation, true involvement of the Principals, the mainstream / regular teachers and management functionaries has been missing as also observed during the proceedings of the case.
18. `Integration’ was envisaged in the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995. With the coming into effect of the RPwD Act particularly the provisions in its Section 16 and Section 31, it is the choice of the child / parent to option for inclusive set up or special school for a child with disability. Section 31 is reproduced below:
“Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, every child with benchmark disability between the age of six to eighteen years shall have the right to free education in a neighborhood school, or in a special school, of his
choice.”
19. Respondent No. 1 therefore needs to follow the guidelines and the orders of the DOE. It also needs to be noted that the educational institutions are duty bound to provide education and opportunities for sports and recreation activities equally with others which the complainant has demanded. Additionally, Section 16 also mandates the appropriate government and local authorities to ensure that all the educational institutions funded or recognized by them, provide inclusive education to children with disabilities and shall, among other things, provide reasonable accommodation according to the individual’s requirements, provide necessary support individualized or otherwise in environments that maximize academic and social development consistent with the goal of full inclusion, detect specific learning disabilities in children at the earliest and take suitable pedagogical and other measures to overcome them.
20. While writing this order I am also conscious of the fact that the strategies and methods for implementing inclusive education are evolving processes and may vary from school to school and have to be modified to suit each child with disability, being unique. But the basic principle of teaching and learning outcomes in respect of each child has to be ensured and should at no cost be compromised. The objective of the legislation is to ensure full inclusion of children with disabilities and also to ensure that they receive quality education on equal basis with others. The concept of inclusive education has to be understood and implemented as envisaged in the RPwD Act. All the necessary arrangements therefore must be made by the educational institutions in NCT of Delhi as mandated in Section 16 of the Act and in the Order dated 28.08.2019 of Directorate of Education.
21. In light of the above discussion, the following recommendations are made:
(i) Respondent No. 1 should ensure teaching of children with disabilities in an inclusive set up as envisaged in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and the orders issued by respondent No. 2 and ensure adequate human and other resources on equal basis with other children. This means there should be no differentiation in provisioning of resources / teachers including for teaching of computer, sports, music and arts between the children of mainstream and Special Wing. The mainstream teachers should be trained and oriented towards the needs of children with disabilities in a time bound manner.
(ii) Respondent No. 1 should initiate the process of converting the Special Wing into a resource room / resource centre and gradually include children with disabilities in the mainstream wing.
(iii) IEP and the goals for each child should be fixed and reviewed from time to time as required by respondent No. 2.
(iv) It should be ensured that children with disabilities including Master Satvik are given equal opportunity not only for learning in the academics but also for extra-curricular activities.
(v) Respondent No. 1 should also examine and intimate the decision about developing the school as a model inclusive school for replication.
(vi) In light of the inadequate awareness and understanding of the system of inclusive education, Directorate of Education should take steps to mandate every Principal, Head of School and the key functionaries of the management to be trained on the provisions for inclusive education in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and Right to Education Act, 2009 as amended in 2012 and the orders issued by Directorate of Education and CBSE etc. from time to time.
(vii) Directorate of Education may either issue separate guidelines for Private Unaided Recognized Schools of Delhi as issued for the Govt. Schools of Directorate of Education vide order dated 28.08.19 or direct the Private Unaided Recognized Schools to follow the order dated 28.08.2019.
22. This Court be informed of the action taken on the above recommendations within three months from the date of receipt of this order as required under Section 81 of the Act which is reproduced below:
“Whenever the State Commissioner makes a recommendation to an authority in pursuance of clause of section 80, that authority shall take necessary action on it, and inform the State Commissioner of the action taken within three months from the date of receipt of the recommendation:
Provided that where an authority does not accept a recommendation, it shall convey reasons for non-acceptance to the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities within the period of three months, and shall also inform the aggrieved person.”
23. The complaint is disposed of.
24. Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 18th day of December, 2019.
(T.D. Dhariyal)
State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Ganga Bisht Vs. The District Coordinator, Dy Director of Education | Case No.842/1031/2019/04/6617-6618 | Dated: 14/10/2019
In
the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
National Capital
Territory of Delhi
25- D,
Mata Sundri Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi.
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act,
2016]
Case
No.842/1031/2019/04/6617-6618 Dated:
14/10/2019
In
the matter of:
Ms,
Ganga Bisht,
R/o RZ-180, Vishwas Park,
Manovikas Institute for Higher Education,
Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi-110059. …………..Complainant
Versus
The
District Coordinator,
Office of Deputy Director of Education,
Vikas Puri,
New Delhi-110002.
..................Respondent
ORDER
The
above named complainant, mother of Baby Samridhi Bisht, a child with Autism (75%
Intellectual Disability), appeared before the State Commissioner for Persons
with Disabilities on 10.04.2019 and submitted that she is facing difficulties
for admission of Samridhi in a private school.
She submitted that as she was not aware about the reservation of 3%
seats for children with disabilities in the private schools, she could not
apply online for admission of her daughter.
She also stated that the private schools do not even allow to enter the
school premises and requested for admission of her daughter in a private school.
2. The complainant further submitted that the child is under treatment
at Kalawati Saran Children Hospital, New Delhi.
The treating doctor has certified that Baby Samridhi Bisht has applied
for disability certificate for Autism which is under process. The doctor also recommended that Baby
Samridhi Bisht be considered for admission to school as the process of issue of
disability certificate may take some more time.
3. As the date for
online admission had already expired. The District Coordinator was advised to get
the child admitted to a nearby Government Sarvodya School and provide all
necessary facilities for teaching and learning vide letter dated 10.04.2019. The complainant was advised to meet The
District Coordinator, Office of Deputy Director of Education, Vikas Puri, New
Delhi.
4. Vide letter dated
3.10.2019, the complainant submitted the disability certificate dated
22.08.2019 in respect of her child Baby Samridhi Bisht issued by Janakpuri
Super Speciality Hospital Society and when she was contacted on her given
telephone mobile number she informed that Samridhi has got admission in Modern
Convent School, Sector-4, Dwarka, Delhi.
5. As the child has
been admitted, the complaint is disposed of.
6. Given
under my hand and the seal of the Court this 14th day of
October, 2019.
(T.D. Dhariyal)
State Commissioner for
Persons with Disabilities
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
Sh. Ashwani Porwal Vs. Principal, Jindal Public School & Anr. | Case No. 815/1032/2019/03/3668-3670 | Dated:23.07.2019
In the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with
Disabilities
National
Capital Territory of Delhi
25-
D, Mata Sundari Road, Near Guru Nanak Eye Centre, New Delhi
Phone-011-23216002-04,
Telefax: 011-23216005,
[Vested with powers of Civil Court under the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act,
2016]
Case No.
815/1032/2019/03/3668-3670 Dated:23.07.2019
In
the matter of:
Sh. Ashwani Porwal,
RZ- 6A/230, J-Block West Sagarpur,
New Delhi-110046. .....Complainant
Versus
The Principal,
Jindal Public School,
Dashrathpuri,
New Delhi-110045. ........Respondent No.1
The Director,
Department of Education,
GNCT of Delhi,
Old Sectt., Delhi-110054. ......Respondent No.2
Date
of hearing: 18.07.2019
Present: Sh.
Ashwani Porwal, Complainant.
Dr.
Mukesh, DDE (IEB) for Respondent no. 2.
Order
The
above named complainant, father of Master Ayush Porwal, a person with moderate
intellectual disability with challenging behaviour vide his complaint dated
26.03.2019 submitted that his son is six years and 10 months of age. He has been allotted Jindal Public School, Dashrathpuri
under 3% reserved seats for children with disability. He does not want to admit his son in the
school as there is no special educator and related staff and equipment. He also submitted that he spoke to the
principal on 14.03.2019, who expressed apprehension that his son may harm other
children in the school. Therefore he
would not send his son to that school.
He requested that his son may be admitted in some other regular school
in nursery where he can study with children of nursery class and where there
are facilities for teaching children with special needs (Autistic) like St.
Marry Dwarka or Golden Jubilee, Suborto Park, New Delhi. If it is not possible, he should be exempted
from paying Rs. 4125/- to Tamanna Autism Centre where his son currently studies.
2. The complaint was taken up under the
provisions of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, hereinafter
referred to as “Act” with the respondents vide notice dated 04.04.2019.
3. Principal, Jindal Pubic School,
Dashrathpuri, Dwarka vide his reply letter dated 06.04.2019 submitted as under:
“Sir,
In reply to the Show cause
notice, it is submitted that the complaint dated 26.03.2019, is false,
frivolous and based on concocted facts.
Sh. Ashwini Porwal has intentionally, deliberately and with ulterior
motive, has alleged that Sh. Ashwini Porwal met the undersigned and the
undersigned has discouraged Sh. Ashwini Porwal from admitting his child in
Jindal Public School. It is pertinent to
mention that Sh. Ashwini Porwal has never met and/or approached the undersigned
in respect to the admission of his ward or in connection to any other matter
thereof. As a matter of fact, his ward
has allotted to Jindal Public School and the undersigned has always been ready
and willing to adhere to the rules and regulations framed by the
authorities. In other words, the School
has no issues whatsoever, in case, the said child is willing to take admission
in our School.
Thanking you
Principal
Jindal Public School”
4.
Vide his rejoinder dated 15.04.2019,
the complainant stated that he is rejecting the allotted school on his own due
to unavailability of required resources.
He reiterated that his son should be admitted to one of the schools
mentioned in his complaint where facilities like Tamanna Autism Centre are
available or Directorate of Education should get the fee exempted at Tamanna
Autism Centre.
5. In view of the rejoinder of the
complainant it was decided to close the complainant. However, the complainant vide his letter
dated 21.05.2019 insisted that Directorate of Education ignored the requirement
of his son and the alternative of allotting his son to some other school. In view of this a hearing was scheduled on 07.06.2019. The complainant reiterated his written
submissions and added that before filing a complaint in this Court, he had submitted
a representation to Dy. Director, Private School Branch, Directorate of
Education on 25.03.2019. The officer of
the Private School Branch recorded on his representation that “Candidate shall
be admitted as per guidelines issued vide Circular dated 27.02.2019” and marked
it to S.O. (Jindal Public School). As he
did not want to admit his son to that school even then and as he was not sure
about the safety and proper education of his child in that school, he did not
submit the representation with the said remarks to the School.
6. Sh. Banne Singh, UDC who appeared on
behalf of the Jindal Public School, submitted that two children with
disabilities were allotted to the school by
DoE for admission in 1st standard for the academic year
2019-20. The other child, Master Mohnish
S/o Sh. Darshan Singh has been admitted and is attending classes regularly.
Master Ayush Porwal has not yet reported for admission. He further submitted that children with
disabilities have been allotted to their school for the first time. Presently,
the school does not have special educator and other facilities / equipments for
teaching / learning of children with disabilities. As per him, now that children with
disabilities have started coming for admission, the school will make necessary
arrangements like appointment of special educators.
7. The Directorate of Education was directed
to submit why the child with Autism was admitted to a school that did not have
facilities for teaching such children and how teaching and learning of master
Ayush Porwal would be ensured. The
Principal of the School was also directed to submit by 21.06.2019, the details
of facilities that the school proposed to put in place to ensure that master
Ayush Porwal and other children with disabilities are taught on equal basis
with other children. The matter was posted
for hearing on 11.07.2019, which was rescheduled on 18.07.2019.
8. Deputy Director of Education (IEB),
District South West-B, Najafgarh, New Delhi vide letter dated 09.07.2019
submitted that—
“As
per RTE Act 2009 and guidelines issued by DOE, 25% seats are reserved for
EWS/DG/CWSN category candidates in Private Recognized Unaided Schools. Ayush Porwal s/o Ashwani Porwal was allotted
Jindal Public School through Computerized Draw of lots conducted by DoE for
EWS/DG including 3% for CWSN category candidates. The school was allotted 25% seats under
EWS/DG including 3% CWSN category wherein name of Ayush Porwal appeared in the
allotted list of Jindal Public School.
The school has stated that a notice from Disability
Commission was received by them and Sh. Banne Singh, UDC of the school attended
the hearing on 07.06.2019 in the Disability Commission wherein the complainant
himself refused to get admitted his ward in the said school and submitted that
since facilities needed for his child is not available at Jindal Public School,
his ward may be retained at Tamana Autism Centre with free ship facility.
Under provision of 12 (1)
(c) a school specified in sub clause (iii) and (iv) of clause(es) of section
shall admit to the extent of at least twenty five percent of the strength for
candidates under EWS/DG/CSN and Tamana Autism Centre is not specified in sub
clause (iii) and (iv) of clause (n) of section (2).
The complainant has
requested for change of school but there is no provision for change of school
once allotted under EWS/DG/CWSN category admission. Further, school is ready to admit the child
but parent of the child is not willing for the same.
Deputy
Director of Education
District
South West-B
Najafgarh,
New Delhi-43”
9. Deputy Director
of Education (IEB) vide letter dated 10.07.2019 has submitted that—
“Master Ayush Porwal is a
child with Mental retardation with features of Autism. He was allotted Jindal
Public School, Dashrathpuri, Delhi through the online admission process for
CWSN and the allotment of schools has been done through computerised
system. The unified system of admission
of CWSN is being followed in compliance to the order of the Hon’ble High Court
of Delhi dated 03.04.2014 in WPC 1225/2014 titled as Pramod Arora Vs Hon’ble LG
of Delhi and Ors. Further, based on the
judgment in the WPC 1225/2014 dated 21.02.2018 the Directorate of Education
(DoE) has reserved 3% of seats under EWS/DG category in Private Un-aided
Recognized Schools in Delhi for Children with disabilities with prior approval
of the Hon’ble L.G. vide notification dated 23rd July 2018.
In this regard it is also
submitted that the DoE has issued directions to all Private un-aided Recognized
Schools to appoint Special Education Teachers and provide Barrier free
Environment to Children with Disabilities vide order dated 19.02.2013.”
In addition to the above,
the Section 16 of the Rights of Person with Disabilities Act, 2016 states that the
appropriate Government and the local authorities shall endeavour that all
educational institutions funded or recognized by them provide inclusive
education to the children with disabilities.
In view of the above facts,
all private un-aided recognized schools should provide appropriate inclusive
education to children with disabilities as provided in Section 16 of the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
This issues with the prior
approval of the Director (Education), GNCTD.
(Dr.
MUKESH CHAND)
DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (IEB)”
10. During the hearing on 19.07.2019, the
complainant reiterated his submissions and added that it is not possible for
him to produce any evidence
in support of his submission about the conversation between him and the
Principal as the School does not allow mobile phone inside the company.
11. As the Principal/ his representative was
not present and no compliance report had been received, the Principal of the
school was contacted on telephone. He
informed that the school has appointed a Special Educator and the other child
who is also with intellectual disability, is attending the school. Since the father of the child does not want
to admit his son in the school, he has no further comments to make.
12. Section 16 of the Act, which mandatory, provides
as under:
“The appropriate Government and the local authorities
shall endeavour that all educational institutions funded or recognised by them
provide inclusive education to the children with disabilities and towards that
end shall—
(i)
admit them without discrimination
and provide education and opportunities for sports and recreation activities
equally with others;
(ii)
make building, campus and various
facilities accessible;
(iii)
provide reasonable accommodation
according to the individual’s requirements;
(iv)
provide necessary support
individualised or otherwise in environments that maximise academic and social
development consistent with the goal of full inclusion;
(v)
ensure that the education to
persons who are blind or deaf or both is imparted in the most appropriate
languages and modes and means of communication;
(vi)
detect specific learning
disabilities in children at the earliest and take suitable pedagogical and
other measures to overcome them;
(vii)
monitor participation, progress in
terms of attainment levels and completion of education in respect of every
student with disability;
(viii) provide transportation facilities to the
children with disabilities and also the attendant of the children with
disabilities having high support needs.”
13. In addition to providing inclusive
education and the necessary facilities required for it as enumerated in Section
16 of the Act, Govt. of NCT of Delhi has reserved 3% seats for children with
disabilities in recognized private schools.
14. It is a fact that all the private or
government schools do not have the required facilities as envisaged in Section
16 of the Act for teaching and learning of children with various disabilities
especially those with autism spectrum disorder, intellectual disability, learning
disability, deafness and blindness, etc.
In the circumstances, the following recommendations are made:
i)
Directorate of Education should set
a reasonable time frame, in the order of priority, in respect of all the
schools for making them fully inclusive schools. Until then, allocation of children with
disabilities should be done based on mapping of availability of relevant facilities
in the schools.
ii)
While it may not be possible to
accept the request of every parent to allocate the school of their choice, flexibility
in accommodating the requests for the purpose of ensuring equitable quality
education to a child with a particular disability should be adopted subject to
reasonable constraints like availability of seats. Provision for such accommodation should be incorporated
in the procedure for draw of lots.
iii)
The recommendation for admission to a
grade/class should also take care of the existing provision for relaxation in
upper age limit upto 9 years in respect of children with disabilities.
15. In view of the assurance by the school and
the instructions of the Directorate of Education and the mandatory nature of
the provisions of Section 16 of the Act, complainant should admit his son to
the allotted school and the school should provide the necessary teaching and
learning facilities. It goes without
saying that Director of Education would have an appropriate mechanism to
monitor provisions in the school and proper implementation. As regards, the apprehension of the
complainant about the security of his son in the school, it is the duty of the
school to ensure safety and well being of all children. I am sure, the Principal of the school shall
assure the parents once the child is admitted and he becomes the student of
that school.
16. This Court/complainant be informed of the
action taken on the recommendation as required under Section 81 of the Act.
17. The complaint is disposed of.
18. Given under my hand and the seal of the
Court this 23nd day of July, 2019.
(T.D. Dhariyal)
State
Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)