The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it would look into the admission of Rohingya refugee children to state-run schools.
A panel of Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh was hearing a special leave petition challenging the Delhi High Court’s refusal to order the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to admit Rohingya refugee children from Myanmar into local schools. At the outset, counsel Ashok Agarwal, representing the petitioner NGO, explained that the purpose of the case was to educate vulnerable Rohingya refugee children.
“Where are the Rohingya families?” “You want to take them out of the refugee camp?” questioned the Justice Kant-led Bench. In response, Agarwal maintained that the youngsters were living normally with their families and not in a camp.
“If they live in a standard residential area, your (petitioner’s) point will be considered. Even if they are confined in camp, your point will be considered, but in a different way. Then you should apply for educational facilities within the refugee camp,” said the Supreme Court.
At this point, the petitioner’s counsel noted that he will file an affidavit identifying the addresses of at least 17 children who are out of school and were denied enrollment to MCD schools. The highest court adjourned the case and gave the petitioner two weeks to file the affidavit.
Earlier, on October 29, the Delhi High Court directed the petitioner, Social Jurist A Civil Rights Group, an NGO, to approach government officials and make a submission to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs to resolve the matter.
The Delhi High Court observed that the public interest litigation (PIL) indirectly aimed to extend the Right to Education (RTE) to non-citizens through a judicial venue, despite the fact that no country’s courts decide who should be granted citizenship.
“What you cannot do directly, you try indirectly. “First, contact the appropriate authorities,” it instructed the petitioner’s counsel. The Delhi High Court dismissed the plea, saying that the reliefs sought in the PIL were significant policy considerations, and the petitioner should approach the Union Ministry of Home Affairs or the Ministry of External Affairs.
Before the Supreme Court, the petitioner claimed that he petitioned both the Union and Delhi governments to issue an order confirming that all refugee children staying in Indian territory are entitled to an education.
“The said representation was followed by reminder dated 28.11.2024, however, no response has been received thereof till date,” the petitioner said. The suit filed before the Delhi High Court argued that the denial of admission to these children owing to a lack of Aadhaar Cards violated the fundamental right to education guaranteed by the Indian Constitution and the RTE Act of 2009.
The argument suggested that while these children remain in India, they are entitled to constitutional rights such as the Right to Education under Articles 14, 21, and 21-A of the Indian Constitution, as well as the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. It further added that it is the obligation of the Directorate of Education and the MCD to guarantee that all children under the age of 14 get admitted to government or MCD schools.
