Supreme Court to consider admission of Rohingya children in MCD schools
The Supreme Court to review the admission of Rohingya refugee children in MCD schools, addressing their right to education under the Indian Constitution and the RTE Act.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India is set to deliberate on the issue of the admission of Rohingya refugee children in Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) schools.
This comes after a special leave petition was filed challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision not to direct MCD to admit these children into local schools.
Table of Contents
The case has raised important questions about the right to education for refugee children in India and the responsibility of the state to provide educational opportunities regardless of citizenship status.
The Case Background: Denial of School Admission to Rohingya Refugee Children
The matter was brought before the Supreme Court by Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group, an NGO advocating for the education of vulnerable Rohingya children.
The NGO argued that Rohingya refugee children, who have been living in Delhi, have been denied admission to MCD schools and are being deprived of their right to education, a fundamental right guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.
The bench, led by Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh, questioned the circumstances surrounding the admission of these children.
Advocate Ashok Agarwal, representing the petitioner, argued that many of these children were living in residential areas and not in refugee camps, which made the case different from the typical refugee scenario.
In response, the court remarked that the issue would require detailed consideration depending on whether the children are residing in regular residential areas or refugee camps.
The petitioner’s counsel assured the court that they would submit an affidavit containing the addresses of at least 17 children who were not enrolled in school and had been denied admission by the MCD.
The Supreme Court has given the petitioner two weeks to file the necessary affidavit for further proceedings.
The Delhi High Court’s Earlier Ruling
The Delhi High Court had earlier dismissed the petition, instructing the petitioner to approach the relevant authorities rather than seeking judicial intervention.
The High Court, in its ruling on October 29, 2024, questioned the PIL’s approach, stating that it indirectly aimed to extend the Right to Education (RTE) to non-citizens, an issue typically handled by the appropriate government authorities rather than the judiciary.
The court had also emphasized that policy matters of this nature were beyond the scope of judicial intervention and suggested that the petitioner take up the issue with the Union Ministry of Home Affairs.
In response, the petitioner contended that they had made several representations to the Union and Delhi governments, requesting an official order clarifying that all refugee children, regardless of their citizenship status, should be entitled to an education.
Despite these efforts, the petitioner claimed that no response had been received from the government.
Legal Perspective: Right to Education for Refugees
At the heart of this legal issue is the question of whether refugee children residing in India have the right to education under the Indian Constitution and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
The petitioner argues that denying education to these children on the grounds of lacking Aadhaar Cards, a common requirement for enrollment in government schools, violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 (Right to Equality), 21 (Right to Life), and 21-A (Right to Education) of the Indian Constitution.
The plea highlights that these children, although refugees, are residing within Indian territory and should be entitled to the same constitutional protections as Indian citizens.
As per the Right to Education Act, children between the ages of 6 and 14 are entitled to free and compulsory education, which the petitioner asserts should extend to all children, including refugees.
Also Read | Supreme Court to Decide Fate of 25,753 School Jobs: What’s Next for West Bengal?
Key Points of the Petitioner’s Argument
- Entitlement to Education
The petitioner argues that refugee children living in India should be granted access to state-run schools, and that the denial of their admission violates their right to education. According to the petition, this right is fundamental under the Indian Constitution, and the MCD and the Directorate of Education are responsible for ensuring that all children under the age of 14 are admitted to school. - Lack of Government Response
The petition also emphasizes that despite repeated representations to the Union and Delhi governments, the petitioners received no response, leaving them with no recourse but to approach the courts for redress. - Discrimination Based on Aadhaar Cards
One of the key points raised in the petition is that the denial of education to these children is primarily due to their lack of Aadhaar Cards, a mandatory requirement for admission in government schools. The petition contends that this requirement is discriminatory and should not bar children from receiving an education, especially in light of their constitutional rights.
The Role of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the case is significant because it could set a precedent for how refugee children are treated under Indian law, particularly regarding access to public services like education.
The outcome of this case could also influence how the Indian government and local authorities approach the issue of refugees’ rights, particularly in urban areas like Delhi.
The case also highlights a broader issue related to the treatment of refugees in India, especially in terms of their social welfare and educational opportunities.
With increasing attention on refugees, especially the Rohingya, the court’s decision could provide much-needed clarity on how non-citizens are entitled to constitutional protections in India.
