MSCPCR Hearing: ‘School, parents, state should have found solution to child’s education’

[related-post]

The parents subsequently moved MSCPCR in 2014, claiming that the school, also based in Kandivali, did not promote their child to Class VI despite an order issued by the education department. They complained that this step by the school went against the no-detention policy as per the Right to Education (RTE) Act. The parents claimed that they had informed the school that their child was studying at home, and accordingly asked the MSCPCR to pass an order so that the child could get admission in Class VI.

The education department, in its order, had asked the school to ensure that the child completes Class V curriculum, passes the class and goes to Class VI. The department had said they would withdraw the school’s no-objection certificate or recognition if they failed to follow the order and violated the RTE Act.

MSCPCR’s previous order said, “The school’s reply shows that the school has tried to pursue the parents to send the child to school. However, the parents did not give any heed in this regard. Merely citing family problem without giving any vaild and reasonable reasons does not establish that in action and in act of omission, as committed by the parents, was genuine and reasonable (SIC).”

The order further said it did not appear that the school had violated provisions of the RTE Act. “Therefore, this matter is disposed of without any recommendation,” the commission ruled in its December 31, 2014 order.

On Thursday, while hearing the review petition filed by the parents, the panel said all stakeholders involved in this case — the parents, the school and the education department — should sit together and discuss the issue to ascertain whether the child was studying at home, and what were the problems owing to which she could not attend school. “In these circumstances, dialogue is necessary. It is important to see what were the circumstances under which the student failed to attend school, and what type of action is required, whether it is evaluation or some other solution,” said the commission.

The commission also asked the education department’s representative as the local authority to clarify in writing whether keeping a child at home was equivalent to keeping the child in school under the RTE Act. While the Act calls for no detention till Class VIII, and it’s the state’s responsibility to ensure every child goes to school, the commission sought to know in what way should the Act be interpreted and what decision should be taken if parents decided not to send their child to school.