Expressing concern over a private school denying admission to a child under EWS category, the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) asked the school to admit the student and submit a compliance report by February 13. Issuing a notice to PP International School, DCPCR said it had denied the child admission in the 2017-18 session due to “mismatch between online details and documentary evidence”, and “doubts over the authenticity of the income certificate submitted”.
As per the commission, the child had been allotted a seat before his parents changed his name. When he went to school to get admission, he was told the documents did not match. DCPCR said the parents had issued an ad declaring the change. “They gave the corrected birth certificate and filed an affidavit,” DCPCR member Anurag Kundu said.
The school challenged this, saying the documents were submitted in August — after the last day of July 22, 2017. Vice-principal Deepti Bector said: “For changing a name, a legal process has to be followed. But DCPCR has tactfully picked up the partial part of the rejection reason — ‘mismatch between online details and documentary evidence’ — while the complete reason was ‘mismatch between online details and documentary evidence in birth certificate’. The child now has two birth certificates.”
However, Section 15 of the RTE Act, 2009, states that a child cannot be denied admission over lack of documents. “As per the RTE, a simple declaration of the child’s age by parent is sufficient proof for admission,” Kundu said. The commission also raised objections to the school saying the child did not belong to the EWS category. “They said the father’s income is more than minimum wage and raised doubts about the income certificate. The school is not an authority to decide. We asked them to write to the authority concerned to verify the authenticity,” Kundu said. But the school said the seat has been carried forward to the next academic session by the Department of Education. “DCPCR has not conducted enquiry of the complainant. It has only passed order against the school,” Bector said.