Do schools have to wait for the notification from DOE before they can start selling the forms ?

plese see i have reproduced the conlusion from todays judgement below:

CONCLUSION
114. From the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent that private unaided
recognized school managements have a fundamental right under
Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to maximum autonomy in the dayto-day
administration including the right to admit students. This right
of private unaided schools has been recognized by an eleven judge
Bench of the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation (supra).
Subsequently, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in P.A.
Inamdar (supra) has held that even non-minority unaided institutions
have the unfettered fundamental right to devise the procedure to admit
students subject to the said procedure being fair, reasonable and
transparent. Even, in 2014, another Constitution Bench of the Supreme
Court in Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust (Registered) & Ors.
(supra) reiterated that the content of the right under Article 19(1)(g) of W.P.(C) 202/2014 & 177/2014 Page 66 of 69
the Constitution to establish and administer private educational
institutions, as per the judgment of this Court in T.M.A. Pai
Foundation, includes the right to admit students of their choice and
autonomy of administration.
115. The concept of autonomy has also been recognized and conferred
upon schools by the DSE Act and Rules, 1973. Rule 145 of DSE
Rules, 1973 states that the head of every recognised unaided school
shall regulate admissions in its school. Consequently, the private
unaided schools have maximum autonomy in day-to-day administration
including the right to admit students.
116. Undoubtedly, the right to administer is subject to reasonable
restrictions under Article 19(6) of the Constitution. It is a settled
proposition of law that the right to administer does not include the right
to mal-administer. In the present instance, there is no material to show
that private unaided schools were indulging in any malpractice or were
misusing their right to admit students in pursuance to the 2007
notification.
117. Also, the restrictions cannot be imposed by way of office orders
and that too, without any authority of law. In State of Bihar and Ors.
vs. Project Uchcha Vidya, Sikshak Sangh and Ors., (2006) 2 SCC
545 the Supreme Court has held that the restriction under clause 6 of
Article 19 of the Constitution can be imposed only by way of a law
enacted by a Legislature and not by issuing a circular or a policy W.P.(C) 202/2014 & 177/2014 Page 67 of 69
decision. Admittedly, no law or restriction has, in the present instance,
been placed upon the petitioners by virtue of Article 21-A and Article
15(5) of the Constitution. Consequently, the Government cannot
impose a strait jacket formula of admission upon the schools under the
guise of reasonable restriction and that too, without any authority of
law.
118. The respondents‟ argument that the impugned office orders have
been allegedly issued under Rule 43 is untenable in law. In any event,
office orders cannot be contrary to Rule 145 of DSE Rules, 1973 and
Guidelines issued by the Central Government under Section 35(1) of
RTE Act, 2009.
119. The argument of the respondents that the impugned office orders
have been issued by virtue of the power conferred under Sections 6, 8,
11, 13, 35 and 38 of RTE Act, 2009 is contrary to the Division Bench
judgment in Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group (supra) wherein it has
been held that except for the Proviso to Section 12(1)(c), none of the
other provisions of the RTE Act, 2009 apply to nursery admission.
120. Further, children below six years have a fundamental right to
education and health as also a right to choose a school under Article
19(1)(a) of the Constitution in which they wish to study. RTE Act,
2009 prescribes duty upon the State to ensure availability of
neighbourhood schools. It nowhere stipulates that children would have W.P.(C) 202/2014 & 177/2014 Page 68 of 69
to take admission only in a neighbourhood school or that children
cannot take admissions in schools situated beyond their neighbourhood.
121. The power to choose a school has to primarily vest with the
parents and not in the administration. In fact, the impugned office
orders fail to consider the vitality as well as quality of the school and
the specific needs of the individual families and students. School
choice gives families freedom to choose any school that meets their
needs regardless of its location. This Court is of the opinion that by
increasing parental choice and by granting schools the autonomy to
admit students, the accountability of private schools can be ensured.
122. Consequently, in the opinion of this Court, children should have
the option to go to a neighbourhood school, but their choice cannot be
restricted to a school situated in their locality. This Court is unable to
appreciate that a student‟s educational fate can be relegated to his
position on a map!
123. This Court is of the view that the neighbourhood concept was
better taken care of by private unaided schools, both in terms of the
guidelines laid down in the Ganguli Committee Report as well as under
the earlier Admissions Order, 2007 inasmuch as graded/slab system
was followed in all schools wherein the person living closest to the
school was given the maximum marks and yet the right of every child
living anywhere in Delhi to seek admission in a reputed school was not
foreclosed.W.P.(C) 202/2014 & 177/2014 Page 69 of 69
124. Consequently, the impugned office orders being violative of the
fundamental right of the school management to maximum autonomy in
day-to-day administration including the right to admit students as well
as the fundamental right of children through their parents to choose a
school, besides being contrary to Supreme Court and Division Bench
judgments are quashed qua private unaided schools with regard to
seventy five per cent general nursery seats. With the aforesaid
observations and directions, present writ petitions stand disposed of,
but with no order as to costs.
MANMOHAN

Please see old Guidelines based on Ganguly report

http://edudel.nic.in/welcome_folder/FINAL_dt_221207.pdf

lets wait for Admissions order to be issued by Govt

judgement has upheld Ganguli committee, which recommended that management quota be allowed but which wold not exceed 20% of toal seats