Nursery Admissions in Delhi NCR 2024-25
Admission Dates | Admission Criteria | Compare schools | Fee Details
Please clear the confusion regarding judgement by judiciary on 8th March and 19th March..
Dear All,
I am really confused and really doubt the term Honorable and feel disgusted with what is happening. Just short of knowledge on few things:
1) Story of 8th March: Crux - The Delhi High Court has rejected the plea to quash the points allotted to alumni and siblings in the nursery admission process and issued notice to the city government on the same, a move which has coming as a disappointment to many parents.
2) Story of 19th March: Crux - NEW DELHI: A fresh petition seeking scrapping of the alumni and sibling criteria in nursery admissions was heard by the Delhi high court on Tuesday. "Renotify the petition for hearing with the pending petition on March 24," a bench comprising acting Chief Justice B D Ahmed and Justice Siddharth Mridul said.
What I am trying to understand is how can same thing be challenged again and again? Also trying to understand the term HONORABLE.
One more confusion: Parents who are master of Constitution and have been reading it daily morning since birth. Can you please answer the question that we are democratic country and what are the details of this aspect. I am a less educated parent and I feel 99.99% parents can file PILs against these educated bunch of super intellectual parents and Government. I think your fight is till your child gets admission in a school.
Please file PILs against distance criteria now... Suggest if you calculate the distance accurately - 525 mtrs (eg) and fight for that criteria. You never know your child may not still get admission. (I really want everyone to get admission but helpless with the attitude of parents)
Pls share your views...
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ranjan on
-
A parent struggling for kids admission does not enjoy PIL and lot of spenditure just for his/her fun..please understand this ground fact before making fun of them. The guideline is so stupid, dynastic and imbalanced that there is no option left except to go to court as it is what constitution has provided us to fight with injustice. I hope this basic fact is very clear to you Shruti. Please have a point math done to find if it is not true that the guideline is as i mentioned? Well if r alumni of a GOOD school then you will not find any injustice!
I encourage people fighting against alumni point up to UN court leave apart the SC.... but only against alumni..sibling point is justified on ground facts.
-
-
Nice to hear about double bench PIL against alumni point. But what was the outcome? If they will fight for alumni point only then only judge will honour the pil. My suggestion is to leave apart the sibling point as it is and fight against alumni point only. I hope i am not giving biased opinion and you agree.
-
-
Yes - that is an extremely biased view. I don't understand why people are only questioning alumni seats! Please note that in all schools ~60% seats have been cornered by sibling points. And frankly, why would parents who haven't got a single seat care about the "discomfort" of another parent whose 2 children can't go to the same school? Also why arent paramaters like girl child quota being questioned? What is the sense of having a reservation on the basis of sex in a co-ed school? Please note that this is a demand-supply issue and needs to be viewed holistically. And if you think that your child wil get an admission just because alumni points get scrapped, you are badly mistaken.
-
-
@ ABCD,
Just like transfer case removal added very few seats, alumni may also add very few seats which the super educated parents will come to know only after alumni points removal comes into effect. Then the parents will fight for Sibling criteria as well. This has been this year story and will continue to do so. Everyone has their own version and I really do not have any version.
Even if there was transfer cases, I was ok with it as long as fake documents came into picture. I would have preferred had the action been taken against the parents who forged documents than removing it. Removing the points entirely gave everyone the excuse to PILs after PILs. May be I have limited knowledge but one of the important reasons to scrap transfer points was forged documents also (among others).
Everyone is an Alumni of some or the other school. You might find alumni of a school who do not want his/her kid to study in the same school. As you can see, there will always be faction of parents who will come up with their logic of constitution, rights etc.
-
Permalink Reply by mahesh jain on
-
if they are few lawyer parents who are filling PILs again and again then.... they are not only seeking admission of there kid but also looking for the so called best and good school..... there PILs will end up there....only. they are not looking for a school but the brand... they can boast of in front of others.. ke.... "mera ladka/ladki to is school me jate hai..."
-
-
Any one knows mt. Carmel anand nikaten...........how s d school
-
-
@ Ranjan - Your opinion is well appreciated but is this the time to raise fingers against guidelines which were issued in Dec. Pls try to understand from the perspective of SIbling & Alumni parents that they have filled the forms only in couple of schools where they were getting maximum points on the basis of sibling / alumni. Fighting is a RIGHT for every PEOPLE. But here is the matter of selfishness. Scrapping this & Scrapping that is not the solution. The total number of seats will not get changed. People must fight on how to enhance the seats & not the points.
-
-
Ppl are forgetting one point is the stats, if somebody goes to court showing the statistics that 40% or 50% seats are occupied by either sibling or alumni then court will have a different view all together.
Court has asked the data of all the schools from DOE and I am sure they are going to study that data before the verdict on 24th.
Neither DOE nor Court earlier had this data and now with the data things can differ.
-
-
@ankush, very right. Now the court can really see the actual picture and not the manuplated studies. The story is different in every school. This needs to thoroughly studied. May the HC gets the real status. All the best fellow parents for 24 the.
-
-
I can understand the condition for parents with sibling/alumni point or both. They must have applied in less schools as they have a sure shot chance there. Hence injustice would be done to them if alumni point is scrapped!
The delay in opposing transfer/alumni point is result of insufficient understanding about the process among first child parents. But at forum the experienced members have always opposed the guideline from beginning.
Since slabbed distance point was not there it left 70 pointers hopeless even if they applied in 40 schools against the chances for sibling/alumni candidate getting admission has 95% chance even if applying to 2 schools. Here it reveals that the the guideline was simply biased and immature.
It is simply a matter that guideline suited to a handful of parents and was against 80% of 70 pointer parents. Event alumni of not so good school will be finding it very biased guideline.
Now for time.. it is already too much late for more PIL .. let us see what comes next from my guess..
1) Proceed with alumni point and injustice of denying equality to most kids and complete the process
2) The only viable option would be to start a fresh so all these PILs as quashed by a balanced new guideline. At least injustice of denying equality will be done away with. Everyone is not going to get top most school..it is well understood.
3) .......<any thing else decided by court..guess>
And i must tell that the guideline must change for next year to prevent the PIL next year tool.. Bad guideline will force people for it.
-
-
Point 2 is going to happen with capping of Alumni into certain percentage and no points to alumni. Sibling points are not going to touch. This is my opinion.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Sumit Vohra (Webmaster).
Powered by
