Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

"An Admission Guideline on age limit is only intended to be a guideline and cannot have the force of a statute", the Madras High Court recently observed while granting relief to a student who had been denied admission in Class VIII for being two months older than the fixed age limit for admission.

The bench of Justice N Seshasayee said, "A guideline means what it says: it is a guideline, nothing more nothing less. A guideline cannot be elevated to the commandments of Solomon. It must be construed reasonably more so when the hardship its strict compliance produces is disproportionate, or even unjust absurd results, it seeks to achieve".

The court was dealing with a plea moved by one Shreya Bhattacharya represented by her father seeking issuance of a Writ of Declaration to declare the maximum age limit prescribed by the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan for Admission in Kendriya Vidyalayas (2022-2023 & Onwards) for class 8 as 14 years 'arbitrary, and contrary to the spirit of the Right to Education Act, and against the Article 21 A of the Constitution of India'.

The petitioner's counsel contended that due to denial of admission for only being two months over the prescribed age for admission in class 8 of the Kendriya Vidyalaya located at the Air Force Campus, petitioner Shyerya, a daughter of a non-commissioned Air Force officer, had been forced to attend a school 30 km away from her house. 

In the counter affidavit to the petition, the Deputy Commissioner of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan averred that the Admission guidelines of KV for the academic year 2022-2023 were in line with the Right to Education Act, 2009 prescribing an age restriction for admission to every class which was not arbitrary.

The personal inconvenience of the petitioner in travelling 30 km a day to her school cannot be a criterion for challenging the Guidelines, he submitted. 

Moreover, the counsel for the respondents contended that "fixing the age limit for admitting a child in the Kendriya Vidyalaya is a policy decision, and it may not be interfered with in judicial review". Reliance was placed on the ratio in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Vs Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth (1984).

This apart, he apprised the court that there was no vacancy in the said school for the present, and the student strength could not be expanded.

The single judge bench pointed out that Shreya was born on January 20, 1999, and on March 31, 2023, she was 14 years and 2 months old, whereas the Admission Guidelines in Chapter XI of the Education Code of the Kendriya Vidyalaya, had set 31st March of the academic year as the determinative date for reckoning the age.

"In terms of the guideline she should have been born on, or after March 31st, if only she were to meet the age criterion as has been prescribed," court said. 

To this, court said, "Should Shreya's parents be blamed, or the Admission Guideline? Shreya cannot understand this. She is puzzled why she should travel 30 km a day for her schooling when she has a school within her campus where she lives".

"Should this Court now hold that the Admission Guidelines are edicts etched in stone, and its inflexibility as understood by its makers is worthy of respect, or, should it find a way within the legal framework for young Shreya to enjoy schooling with lesser strain?" Justice Seshasayee wondered. 

Therefore, while stressing that the court would have appreciated the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, a registered society, funded entirely by the Government, to have approached the issue with reasonable sensitivity to the difficulties of a young girl, court underscored that when the KV Guidelines were closely read, it appeared the age limit was not inflexible but could be relaxed for addressing special situations such as physically challenged students and those in Class XII.

While terming the case at hand a 'test case', and clarifying that court was not keen to rewrite the existing guidelines, it held that Shreya's right to life, her right to easy and hassle-free education was supreme.

Accordingly, without meddling with the guidelines now available and only to create an exception to deal with the larger right of Shreya, court allowed the present petition and directed the Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya at the Air Force Station in Tambaram to admit Shreya to Class VIII, relaxing the age-criterion alone, but not other criteria required for admission.

"It is clarified that the exception to age-criterion as provided in the Guidelines may be made only to meet exceptional situations such as this, and the ratio of this order will have validity only till the first respondent makes suitable amendments to its Admission Guidelines," court added. 

Case Title: Shreya Bhattacharya v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Others