Right to Education to be Protected

Ramchandra Tandi and 30 Others vs. State of Orissa and Others

Filed under: Articles 21, 39 (c), (f) Constitution of India, 1950
Appellant: Ramchandra Tandi and 30 Others
Respondent: State of Orissa and Others
Citation: AIR 1994 Orissa 228
Court: In the High Court of Orissa
Judges: A. Pasayat and S.K. Mohanty

This is an appeal filed against the State of Orissa for refusing to grant aid to a school run for the hearing and speech impaired children.

Facts

A school for physically handicapped children was started in the year 1991 called the “Physically Handicapped School at Bargarh.” This institution had three Sections, one each for blind, the mentally retarded and for the ‘dumb and deaf’. The institution was started with the active help and assistance of a registered society.

Thereafter, recognition was granted by the State to the mentally retarded and the blind sections of the school. However, no recognition was granted to the deaf and dumb section. The guardians of the deaf and dumb boys then filed the present Writ Petition against such an action of the State Government.

A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the State in which direction was given to close the dumb and deaf section of the school. It was contended that since a voluntary organization had taken up the job of running the school, it was duty bound to see its smooth continuance and the State was not under any obligation to provide financial assistance.

It was acknowledged that the school had been started to impart education to the dumb and deaf, blind and mentally retarded children and the government had recognized the need to grant aid to the blind and the mentally retarded sections of the school and had accordingly granted them aid.

It was further added that in order to avoid unnecessary financial burden on the State Government, the dumb and deaf section had not been recognized. With reference to this, it was also stated that the deaf and dumb were not so handicapped for movement like the blind and mentally retarded students and therefore the other two categories stood on a different footing.

Observations of the Court

The Court referred to a letter submitted by the Collector of the district of Sambalpur who had noticed that 40 children, who had been maintaing their livelihood through begging had been brought to the school and developed remarkably well. It was further stated in the letter that because of their training in the school, these students had competed in the January 26 parade, and had been awarded shields and cups.

The Collector, in the letter, had also requested for necessary recognition and sanction of grant-in-aid in favor of the school to save 62 dumb and deaf children. After taking into account, this letter the Court pointed out that because of the proper guidance provided by the school these children had been able to create a national record.

Further, the Court referred to several provisions of the Constitution and held that it was quite pained at the stand taken by the State Government regarding this issue. It was further stated by the Court that such children deserved to be rehabilitated so that a new dimension could be given to their lives. Furthermore, the Court held that the reasons given by the Government for denying recognition and refusing to provide financial aid were extremely shallow.

The Court directed the State to grant recognition and to provide financial assistance to the dumb and deaf section. The Writ Petition was thus allowed with costs.

Sections Referred:

  • Articles 21, 39 (c), (f) Constitution of India, 1950