By IANS,
New Delhi : The Delhi High Court Thursday issued notice to the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS), the ministry of human resource development and the Directorate of Education on a petition challenging the legality of KVS admission guidelines for economically weaker students.
A division bench of Acting Chief Justice A.K. Sikri and Justice Rajiv Shah Endlaw sought the response of the authorities by Feb 22.
The petitioner, advocate Ashok Aggarwal, alleged that the KVS Admission Guidelines 2012-2013 for admission in Class 1 for the Disadvantaged Group/Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) violate the provisions of the right to education act.
The petition stated that KVS has provided 22.5 percent reservation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes within the 25 percent reserved quota for children belonging to disadvantaged groups, including SCs/STs.
Aggarwal argued that this was not permissible under the right to education act since it translates into “reservation within reservation” and is invalid.
“KVS has reserved 25 percent seats for the children belonging to disadvantaged group and EWS but at the same time, introduced 22.5 percent reservation of the total seats for SC/ST in the said reserved category of 25 percent seats, resulting in unjust discrimination among the categories of students falling under the reserved categories of disadvantaged group and EWS,” the petition said.
Aggarwal asked the court whether there can legally be a reservation within reservation for SCs/STs.
Citing an example, Aggarwal said, out of the total 10 seats reserved for children belonging to disadvantaged groups and EWS under the 25 percent reserved seats, nine seats would go to SC/ST and one seat would be left for children belonging to other backward classes, children with disabilities and others.
“If nine seats out of 10 seats are reserved for SC/ST percentage of reservation would not only be 22.5 percent but would be 90 percent, which is otherwise also, not permissible in law.”
Besides seeking the court’s directions for the KVS to reframe its admission guidelines 2012-13 for Class 1 in accordance with the law, the petitioner also sought to declare the guidelines arbitrary and unconstitutional.