1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.07.2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD)No.5039 of 2011 S.Jeyakumar .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Union of India, Rep. By the Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, 18, Institution Area, Shaheed Jeet Singnh Marg, Delhi – 110 302. 2.The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Narimedu, Madurai – 625 002. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya, I.T.I.Campus, Chennai – 600 032. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Declaration, to declare in Para 4(A) of the guidelines for admission to Kendriya Vidyalayas for the year (2011-12) by fixing a child must be 5 years old as on 31st March in the academic year in which admission is being sought for admission to 1st standard as illegal and arbitrary as against the Art 21-A of the Constitution of India so far as the petitioner concerned and consequently direct the respondents to pass such further orders. For Petitioners : Mr.K.C.Ramalingam For Respondents : Mr.E.T.Rajendran O R D E R Seeking for a Writ of Declaration, to declare in Para 4(A) of the guidelines for admission to Kendriya Vidyalayas, for the academic year 2011-12, fixing the minimum age of a child must be 5 years old, as on 31st March, as the qualification for admission to Standard-I, as illegal and arbitrary against Art. 21-A of the Constitution of India, in so far as the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner has come forward with this present writ petition. 2.It is the case of the petitioner that his daughter Kumari J.Sharon Priyadharshini was born on 09.04.2006. Both the parents are Central Government employees. When the petitioner made an https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 application for admission to Standard-I, in Kendriya Vidyalaya School, Narimedu, Madurai, she was short of eight days for completion of 5 years, as on 31.03.2011 and that therefore, her candidature for admission was not considered. In these circumstances, the petitioner has come forward to seek for a relief of declaration, as stated supra. 3. Mr.K.C.Ramalingam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the academic session for children between Standards O to IX starts during 3rd week of June, 2011, as per the guidelines and therefore, there is no point in fixing 31.03.2011, as the cut-off date for determining the minimum age limit, for admission to Standard-I in Kendriya Vidyalaya. According to him, as the commencement of academic session starts in June 2011, the petitioner would satisfy the requirement of completion of five years, on the date of commencement of the academic session, and in which case, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents and therefore, shortage of 9 days, in the case of the petitioner's daughter, can always be condoned. Otherwise, she has to lose one year of admission. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that even in Government Schools, Aided Schools in Tamil Nadu, children are admitted taking into consideration the age, as on first June and that if the child does not complete five years on the crucial date, relaxation is given by the competent authority extending the cut-off date upto September or October of the Academic year. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that fixing of five years age, as on 31st March for the academic year is in violation of Article 21(A) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees free and compulsory education. 4.The Principal, Kendriya Vidyala Sangathan, Narimedu, Madurai, the second respondent herein, has filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein, he has contended that there are more than 1000 Kendriya Vidyalas functioning in India under the control of Ministry of Human Resources Department, Government of India. In Chennai Region, there are 71 Kendriya Vidyalas. In each year, admissions to classes from Standard-I are being made in accordance with the guidelines of Kendriya Vidyalas. The Guidelines for admission for the Academic year 2011-12 were issued and that the same have to be followed by all Kendriya Vidyalayas throughout India. Referring to paragraph 4 of the guidelines, which prescribes the eligible age for admission to Standard-I, the Principal, Kendriya Vidyala Sangathan, Narimedu, Madurai, the second respondent herein, has submitted that for admission to Standard-I, in Kendriya Vidyala, a child must be five years old, as on 31st March in the Academic year, in which admission is being sought for Standard-I and for admission to Class-II, the age must be 6 years. For Class-III, the age must be 7 years and for Class-IV, the age must be 8 years, as on 31st March 2011. For remaining classes, the eligible age will be taken as on 30th September of the Academic year. Academic year means, a period of 12 months beginning from 1st April to 31st of March of the following year. He further submitted that as per the guidelines, applications have been issued and registered from 15th February 2011 onwards till 20.03.2011. Thereafter, a list of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 containing selection of the children for admission would be prepared in accordance with guidelines and that the same was approved by the Executive Committee of Vidyalaya on 28.03.2011, after approval of the list, the selection would be declared and students should be admitted. In the first week of April 2011, the classes would be started. As as on today, the School is functioning with full strength and there is no vacancy in Class- I, to accommodate anyone. 5.The second respondent has further stated that out of several applications received for admission to Class-I, 20 applications were rejected due to under age, which includes the petitioner's application for her daughter. According to him, the petitioner has not completed the mandatory requirement of five years, as on 31.03.2011, she was short of 9 days. With reference to the contention that there is a violation of Article 21(A) of the Constitution of India, the second respondent has submitted that the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of age of 6 to 14 years. The petitioner, whose age is only five years, cannot claim any right under Art.21(A) of the Constitution of India. For the above said reasons, the Principal submitted that they have neither acted against the Constitutional provisions nor any provisions of a Statute, and for the abovesaid reasons, prayed for dismissal. 6.Before adverting to the facts of the case, it is necessary to extract the eligible criteria prescribed under the Guidelines for admission to Kendriya Vidyalas for the Academic year 2011- 12. Clause 4 of the guidelines deals with the age, which is extracted hereunder:- “4.ELIGIBLE AGE FOR ADMISSION: A. A child must be 5 years old on 31st march in the academic year in which admission is being sought for admission to class I and for admission to class II the age must be 6 years. For class III age must be 7 years and for class IV age must be 8 years as on 31st March, 2011. For remaining classes, the eligible age will be calculated as on 30th September of the Academic year. B. An upper age limit for admission is fixed as the minimum age limit plus two years. No child would be eligible for admission in a class, if the age is more than the maximum age prescribed. The maximum age would be further relaxed by two years for handicapped children only. All such cases will be disposed of at the level of the Principal. Minimum and maximum age for the session 2011-12 are given below:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 CLASS MINIMUM AGE ON 31ST MARCH OF THE YEAR IN WHICH ADMISSION IS SOUGHT MAXIMUM AGE ON 31ST MARCH OF THE YEAR IN WHICH ADMISSION IS SOUGHT I 5 Years 7 Years II 6 Years 8 Years III 7 Years 9 Years IV 8 Years 10 Years CLASS MINIMUM AGE ON 30TH MARCH OF THE YEAR IN WHICH ADMISSION IS SOUGHT MAXIMUM AGE ON 31ST MARCH OF THE YEAR IN WHICH ADMISSION IS SOUGHT V 9 Years 11 Years VI 10 Years 12 Years VII 11 Years 13 Years VIII 12 Years 14 Years IX 13 Years 15 Years X 14 Years 16 Years C. There is no age restriction for admission to class XI provided the concerned child is seeking admission in the year of passing the class X examination. Similarly there will be no upper & lower age limit for study of the child after passing class X / XI.” 7.Prescription of a particular age, for admission to different Standards with a cut-off date, is purely the exclusive domain of the Government under whose control Kendriya Vidyalas are functioning. The petitioner, who is an applicant for admission to Standard-I, has no legal or constitutional right to demand that the age should be less than five years, as on 31st March of 2011 for admission to Standard-I in Kendriya Vidyalas. Commencement of academic year is also within the executive domain of the Ministry of Human Resources Department, Government of India, under whose control 1000 Kendriya Vidyalas are stated to be functioning. The schedule of selection for Standard-I, as per the counter affidavit is that applications were invited and registered from February 2011 till 20.03.2011. Thereafter, a list containing the selection of children, for admission has to be prepared in accordance with the guidelines and after approval, the admission has to be finalized by 31st March 2011 and that, in the first week of April 2011 itself the classes have to be commenced. 8.It could be further deduced from the counter affidavit that guidelines have been issued by the Ministry of Human Resources Department, Government of India, New Delhi, fixing minimum and maximum age, as on 31st March of the Academic year, in which, admission is sought for, for Standards I to IV and in respect of Classes 5 to 10, there is also a prescription of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5 minimum age, as on 30th September of the Academic year. Merely because, different cut-off date is fixed for reckoning the minimum and maximum age for Standards V to X, it cannot be contented that there is discrimination in violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Children of young age, who seek admission to Standards I to IV, cannot be compared with those who seek for admission in other Standards. Needless to say that children of young age are not to be burdened with heavy load of subjects or activities within a short duration and that the period of study, need to be commenced, with less number of working hours, so that would not be tired. That is why, in most of the Schools, Classes for the children are started early, in the Academic year and also closed, earlier than other Standards. As stated supra, prescription of a particular age for admission to the course Standard, is a prerogative of the Government, which regulates admission. 9. Though the following judgment has been rendered in the case of admission to MBBS Course, where a minimum age of 17 years was fixed, yet the judgment, can be pressed into service, where the power of the Government to fix a particular age with reference to a cut-off date, has been sustained. In S.R.Bhupeshkar and others Vs. The Secretary, Selection Committee Sabarmathi Hostel, Kilpauk, Medical Hostel Campus, Madras and others reported in 1995 (2) L.W. 596, wherein at para No.71, the Full Bench of this Court, while considering the question regarding the relaxation of age and the prayer to declare that Clause 2.2 of the then prospectus, in so far as it states that no request for relaxation would be entertained, rejected the declaration sought for and held that the Government is entitled to fix age limits and there is no justification, whatever for interfering with the same. Earlier a Division of this Court considered the question in detail and answered it, in the negative in W.P.Nos.15231 and 16400 of 1993 by judgment dated 18.02.1994 and that the Full Bench was in agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench. 10.In yet another decision in Akila Kannan Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by Secretary, Public Health Department, Chennai and others reported in (2009) 6 MLJ 1044, a learned Single Judge of this Court, after considering the powers of the Medical Council of India in prescribing minimum age for admission to MBBS/BDS Courses has taken the same view. Though the judgments stated supra pertains to admission to MBBS/BDS, admittedly, a higher education, falling under Entry 66 of Schedule-I to the Constitution of India, the principles underlined in the abovesaid judgments, that the Government has the exclusive power in prescribing a specific age for admission, to a Course or Standard can be made applicable to the facts of this case also. 11.As regards, the contention that in the matter of prescription of age limit, there is a violation of Article 21(A) of the Constitution of India, a bare reading of the Constitutional provision would show that the State shall provide a free and compulsory education to all children of age 6 to 14. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6 As rightly contented by the Principal, Kendriya Vidyala Sangathan, Narimedu, Madurai, the second respondent herein, the petitioner, whose age is only five years, cannot assail any violation of the above said Constitutional Provision, just because, there is a prescription of age for admission to Standard-I in Kendriya Vidyalas. 12.In Anagha T.J., Minor Represented by Sri Jagathjeevan T.K. Vs The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan W.P.(C) No.7631 and 9901 of 2008, a similar case came up for consideration before the Kerala High Court. The prayer in the above writ petition was “for quashing Ext.P4 to the extent it prescribed 31st of March, 2008 as the cut off date for completing 5 years of age for admission to Class I in Kendriya Vidyalaya Schools. According to the petitioner, on account of fixation of 31st of March, 2008, as the date for completing 5 years for admission to Class-I, now introduced as per Ext.P4 in WP(C) No.9901/08, they will be ineligible and there is no possibility of their getting admission to primary classes. “ 13.The contentions of the petitioner therein are reproduced from the judgment in WP(C) 7631 & 9901/08;- “Petitioners submits that going by the norms which were in vogue, a child should have completed atleast 5 years as on 30th of September, and that WPC 7631 & 9901/08 the said norms are now been revised requiring completion of 5 years as on 31st of March. It is contended that in terms of the examination bylaws which are required to be followed as per the affiliation bylaws and in particular Clause 6 thereof, a student should satisfy the requirements of age limit as determined by the State/Union Territory Government and applicable to the place where school is located. It is submitted that in so far as Kerala is concerned, going by Kerala Education Rules, the age requirement to be satisfied is as on 1st of June and therefore, at any rate the prescription of 31st of March now introduced in Ext.P4 cannot be sustained. The contentions similar are also raised by the petitioner in WP (C) 7631/08.” 14.The objections of Kendriya Vidyala are similar to the one pleaded in the case, before this court. In addition to the above, the Kendriya Vidyala has also submitted before the Kerala High Court that the norms for admission were subject matter of a litigation before the Delhi High Court, and that the Delhi High Court appointed “Ganguly” Committee, under the leadership of the Chairman of the CBSE itself. The committee submitted its report to the High Court, which was accepted by the Delhi High Court by its order dated 26/9/2007. The report of the Committee was that the cut off date for the calculation of age https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7 should be 31st March of the year of admission. A child should have completed four years on or before 31st March of the year of admission, to be considered eligible for gaining admission to pre-primary class. A child should have completed a minimum of five years on or before 31st March of the year of admission, to be considered eligible for gaining admission to Class I. The cut off date of 31st March will be of the academic year for which admission will be taken. 15.It was further submitted by the Kendriya Vidyalaya that following the orders of the Delhi High Court, Kendriya Vidyalayas have resolved that in so far as admission to Std I is concerned, that prescription of age should be satisfied, as on 31st of March of the relevant year and that there would be uniformity in all their schools. It is stated that unlike in the state schools, their academic year is different and that it is permissible in terms of CBSE Regulations. 16.While answering the issue, the Kerala High Court in its Common Judgment in WP(C) 7631 & 9901 of 2008, dated 02.04.2008, has held as follows:- “Vidyalaya Schools including those affiliated to CBSE are concerned, they are all following a uniform system in the matter of age requirement. It is not as though this condition has been prescribed without any application of mind. As already noticed, the Ganguly Committee appointed by the Delhi High Court had gone into the matter, conducted detailed studies and submitted its report to the Delhi High Court which was accepted by that court. It is therefore that it is to maintain uniformity that Kendriya Vidyalaya authorities resolved to implement the said decision in so far as their schools are concerned. The decision so arrived at on the materials available before the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan cannot be faulted and I do not find any reason to interfere with the prescription of age which is now uniformly followed by all Kendriya Vidyalayas in the country.” 17.Thus it could be seen from the above, that prescription of age for admission has been done, after careful consideration by a committee and on the orders of the Delhi High Court and that the same is being applied uniformly throughout the country. There is constitutional violation as alleged. 18.Lastly, the contention that there are some seats remaining vacant in Kendriya Vidyala Sangathan, Narimedu, Madurai and that a direction may be issued to the second respondent to admit the petitioner, as against any one of the vacancies, cannot be countenanced for the reason that, according to Principal of the Second respondent School, all the seats have been filled up and that classes had already commenced. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8 19.In view of the above, the relief sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be granted. Hence, the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The Union of India, Rep. By the Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, 18, Institution Area, Shaheed Jeet Singnh Marg, Delhi – 110 302. 2.The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, Narimedu, Madurai – 625 002. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya, I.T.I.Campus, Chennai – 600 032. +One Cc to Mr.K.C.Ramalingam, Advocate, SR.No.23626 MPK rl/5c – 9.9.2011 W.P.(MD)No.5039 of 2011 19.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/