: Priyanshu, a six-year-old boy with a prosthetic leg who lives close to the Delhi-Ghaziabad border, is waiting for the day he goes to a ‘private school’.
In Loni, just 2.3 km away from his house is the private school – Siddharth International Public School – which has been refusing admission to Priyanshu despite the Delhi High Court orders. According to the school, “It cannot open its doors to anyone who is poor and has got a court order”.
Each day, Priyanshu returns from the municipal school and rests on a charpoy at his modest house in Ghaziabad’s Amar colony. Sitting in the small house, he dreams of going to a good school. His mother Babli, a widow and mother of six, believes that “quality education can make up for his physical disability”.
“I can count. I can read. I enjoy school. I want to become a teacher,” says Priyanshu.
The legal tussle began last year when the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) was hearing Priyanshu’s petition for compensation for loss of limb. He was just two years old when a truck ran over his left foot in UP’s Barot village. Lack of medical care led doctors to amputate his leg twice, first till the foot, later till the knee.
His father died of cancer soon after.
Babli, meanwhile, requested the MACT that Priyanshu be sent to a good school. Her advocate had then proposed the Siddharth International as the nearest private school. An order to this effect was passed.
Since then, the school has lost all challenges to this order, with even the Delhi High Court asking it to admit the boy.
With the current academic session nearly over, the Delhi government’s advocate Shadan Farasat says the Department of Education (DoE) will file a contempt petition against the school for denying him EWS seat. However, the school has moved the Supreme Court saying it has no vacant EWS seat.
‘Can’t set precedent’
Amid all this, the disposable spoons factory where Babli worked shut down. She now makes tassles that gets her ₹3,000 every month. “I am trying hard for Priyanshu because I know good education will ensure he is not dependent on his siblings. I cannot be there for him forever,” says Babli.
The director of the school, Shashi Kant Bharti, minced no words when he said that the school was in “no mood to set a precedent that it is open to anyone who is poor and wants quality education. It is as if someone utters our name and gets admission. There has to be a vacant seat.”
Another argument he put forth was, “That poor boy is at least getting midday meal in the municipal school. No one understands this.”
“The law says every fourth child has to be from the Economically Weaker Section (EWS). Of the 34 seats in Class I, seven are EWS students,” said Mr. Bharti, even as the high court held that the number of EWS seats are to be calculated based on the total strength of the class. In this case, the number of EWS seats comes to 8.5, which means there is room for Priyanshu.
Mr Bharti added, “We don’t have a problem in giving him admission if the government prays for it on humanitarian grounds. Why is it trying to prove that there is a vacant EWS seat? We can’t set an unhealthy precedent for ourselves and other private schools.”
‘No age proof’
He said, “The boy has no proof of his age”. This, as the court noted that “discrepancy in date of birth is due to poverty, ignorance and backwardness of his relatives”.
The RTE Act, meanwhile, says “No child shall be denied admission in a school for lack of age proof”.
According to advocate and activist Ashok Aggarwal, the law entitles a disabled child to free and compulsory education in an appropriate environment till he attains the age of 18 years.
Family to the rescue
Priyanshu’s eldest brother Gaurav, who is a school dropout, has volunteered to pick and drop him to school.
The school, which says that a student’s residence should be within a 1 km radius, added, “The boy will get tired and end up spending time and money on travelling”.
The law, however, says that if a child lives within 3 km, he/she can be admitted.
With Class I on the first floor, the school says it can’t hire a person to support Priyanshu. The high court, however, had said in 2012 that provisions for a barrier-free environment cannot be deferred till the school decides to admit students with special needs.
