Comment

Comment by Amar on February 13, 2013 at 10:44am

i think the judgement would take into account everything including the points system..the only point i have is that with whatever the new system is devised, the admission procedure should be repeated from issuing of forms..so that all parents have a fair chance to apply to schools as per the new issued guidelines

Comment by Natasha Kochhar on February 13, 2013 at 10:33am

The hearing seems to be only about RTE and its applicability to nursery... What about point system change?

Comment by Har Prateek Arya on February 13, 2013 at 10:28am

@Sakshi Man: does this mean that even if the Central Government clarifies that RTE is not applicable to children below 6 years and classes lower than First, then also any notifications issued by the Ministry or Delhi Government detailing some criteria or process as per RTE ACT shall also not remain tenable as they were issued assuming that these notifications under RTE were applicable to Nursery admissions also???

Comment by Natasha Kochhar on February 13, 2013 at 12:05am

Also Mr. UMESH.. You have just repeated what I said in your previous post to Amar.. : "The only way out is having more schools, focusing on development of private schools (yes, government can play a role here), and developing government schools as well. "... That's all I was saying, that the point system staying or not staying is pointless, a lot of people will be unhappy either way.. The focus of PILs and discussions should be how the govt can improve basic education std in govt schools because it IS the GOVTs responsibility ( to which you disagreed in response, but repeated what I said in your post pasted above to Amar!) Nothing new will be applicable this year given the 11th hour.. Because its a tough life in this country!!! I was expressing REALITY CHECK, not advocating the way this country works!! How you read JUNGLE RAJ and LUNACY in that (LOL).. Proves my point about your comprehension and getting personal... Not replying to my posts just goes further in proving my opinion about you, WHICH I ONLY expressed after you wrote fairly harsh about my being a lunatic and faulty articulation.. I still can't believe a grown man can write like this in public!

Comment by Natasha Kochhar on February 12, 2013 at 11:37pm

@ UMESH.. Pl mind your language.. You have NO RIGHT to call me a lunatic, just shows your immature mindset pointing fingers and getting personal... I know more than you can even imagine, don't judge me when you don't know who I am or my educational background... Be more open minded in life... Sakshi, pl look into this mans language. It's a free country, I'm free to have my opinion.. You started rough talk by CLAIMING i expect JUNGLE RAJ to exist, and now you call me a lunatic..... is that not silly comprehension? Someone thinks differently from you UMesh... Deal with it!

Comment by Sakshi (Moderator) on February 12, 2013 at 9:25pm

Delhi nursery admissions: Govt keeps HC waiting for opinion on RTE
by Pallavi Polanki Feb 12, 2013

New Delhi: The suspense over the Delhi High Court judgment on nursery admissions continued into the second week with the Centre continuing to dither on making its stand clear on whether the Right to Education (RTE) Act applies to nursery or pre-school.

After a marathon hearing of final arguments, the High Court had reserved its judgment on 30 January.

While the Minister of State for Human Resource Development Shashi Tharoor had in a recent media interview said that the RTE Act did not apply to nursery admissions, the Centre is yet to inform the High Court of its stand on the scope of the RTE Act, forcing the court to call a hearing.

Apologising for holding up the judgment, the government counsel told the court that as of yesterday (11 February) the opinion of the law ministry had been sought and requested the court to grant it time till tomorrow (13 February to submit its response.

Reuters
Expressing its keenness to know where the government stands, the court said, “Without the stand of the government we can issue the judgment. But we don’t want to do that. We want to know what the definite stand of the government is.”

The High Court is hearing a writ petition filed by NGO Social Jurist that has challenged notifications issued by the Centre and the Delhi Government that allowed private unaided schools to come up with their own criteria for nursery admissions. The result – where schools allot points to categories such as sibling and alumni and admit students based on the points they earn – the petition states is a violation of the RTE Act which prohibits any sort of screening procedure that discriminates between children.

However, the RTE Act’s definition of a child as being 6 to 14 years has revived the question of the scope of the Act and its applicability to nursery where children are below 6 years.

Seeking the government’s clarification on what regulates nursery admissions in the event that the RTE Act does not apply to it, the court said, “Suppose we take the stand that the Act does not apply to nursery or pre-school, then how are you going to regulate nursery admissions? We have been informed that here in Delhi all admissions are made at nursery stage and admission to class 1 is automatic. If that interpretation is given, then what will happen? Then all this screening procedure, capitation fee, cannot be implemented at class 1 admission. Therefore, naturally, those provisions cannot be implemented at all.” (The court presumably referring to provisions in the RTE Act that prohibits screening procedures.)

Ashok Agarwal, advocate representing Social Jurist, makes the case that if “pre-primary classes are not covered by the provisions of the RTE Act, it would lead to an anomalous situation where children are admitted in pre-primary classes by subjecting them to a screening procedure and thereafter promoting them to higher classes. A six-year old child so promoted to Class I would have already been screened at the pre-primary level and, therefore, the prohibition contained in Section 13 of the Act against screening would completely lose its meaning.”

Giving the government one more day, the Court has asked it to respond on two specific questions: Whether the Act is applicable to nursery school? And two, if it is not applicable, what is the procedure to be followed for nursery admissions?

http://www.firstpost.com/delhi/delhi-nursery-admissions-state-keeps...

Comment by sarika gupta on February 12, 2013 at 8:33pm

 N K Bagrodia school rohini is doing wrong.....15 points extra for first child to 3 students....whereas on first sheet of the same list points of same category were 5 only.....m  vry disappointed wid the list...my home is vry near to school...i think parents r toooooo close to d mgt....huhh

Comment by Dr Rashmi on February 12, 2013 at 8:18pm

Can any of the parent comprehend Pallavi Polanki article

This year i don't think they will change anything or its still 50 :50 any lawyer online?

Comment by Amar on February 12, 2013 at 6:51pm

@ Umesh  -  :) . How about reversing the criteria to say 50 % reserved for distant area. Equally fair aint it, unless the definition of fair includes "neighbourhood has priority". That is what i'm debating against. Hope I'm able to get my point through

Comment by Umesh on February 12, 2013 at 6:42pm

@Amar - 50% of the seats in any school should be reserved for neighbourhood kids. No matter what. If there are more candidates than the seats reserved for the neighbourhood kids, then a lucky draw should be held. The remaining 50% of the seats should be open to people from distant area and a lucky draw should determine who gets the seats. Fair chance. 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 24
• 25
• 26
• 27
• 28
• …
• 39
• Next ›
• Page