Deep-laid Conspiracy between OSCPCR and a Private English Medium School to destroy academic career of a Child yielded no result.
· Odisha Child Rights Commission’s desperate bid to protect a Private English Medium School, an Institution committed crime against child miserably failed.
· OSCPCR could not be able to protect interest of a child who was physically harassed and mentally tortured by the Principal and teachers of a Private School.
· The Commission took around 4 months to dispose the Complaint (Case No.-810/15) on serious allegation of torture and harassment of a child which in fact requires urgent intervention.
· Though OSCPCR finally finished the hearing of the case on 20.2.16 but passed order after 20 days gap on 11.3.2016 and sent to the Complainant on 20.3.16. It proves the inefficiency and carelessness of the Commission.
· The Commission got active and serious to dispose this complaint case only when the District Child Welfare Committee Khurda, another quasi-judicial constituted to protect the interest of the children promptly enquired the same complaint case filed by another complainant on behalf of the child and took immediate steps while passing outstanding order on 13.2.16 with direction to Bhubaneswar Model School to admit the child immediately and recommending to State Govt. to initiate legal action against the Authority of the School under Right to Education Act.
· The Commission also got psychologically disturbed, when RTI Application was also submitted to the PIO, office of OSCPCR seeking copy of the order of the Complaint Case No. 810/15. So the Commission left no stone unturned to pass the order to save their face.
· At the outset, OSCPCR tried its best to protect the interest of the School at the cost of the child and maintained ominous silence for months together without making any order to ensure admission of the child in school.
· Despite their hard efforts, OSCPCR could not succeed to protect the private school and was forced to finally passed order to the School authority to admit the child and to observe the laws to provide all protection to the child.
· It is very interesting to note here that the Commission’s order came in such a time when the school exam is already over.
· While going through the content of the order-sheet of the Commission and language used and section referred, it was observed that the OSCPCR had followed the order of District Child Welfare Committee, Khurda which was passed and circulated immediately through e-mail and by post on 13.2.16.
1. Srikant Auropratik, son of Prakash Ch. Nayak and Mrs. Amita Subhada ( M-8763790311) , a Class-9 student was physically tortured, humiliated and mentally harassed ( scolding and misbehaving) by the authority of Bhubaneswar Model School @ Takshashila , IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar and suddenly dropped to Class-VIII in the middle of the year on the ground of bad performance. When the parents asked for Progress Report of the child, the authority of the school continued to ignore their request till yet. The parents were also threatened to take back to other schools without citing any ground. Though the parents appraised the authority that “no school was ready to take student in mid-session as CBSE registration has completed”, the authority remained adamant and asked the parents to take the children back. Ultimately, Srikant Auropratik was humiliated and suffered from mental depression and forced to leave the school on 29.10.15.
2. on 3.11.15, the Parents approached the Odisha Child Rights Commission by filling complaints levelling details of allegation, mental torture, harassment caused to their son and seeking quick justice for their child. Ms. Rajalaxmi Das, Member, OSCPCR registered the case ( Case No.-810/15 ) on 4.11.15 and initiated the enquiry.
3. Without taking any quick measures for the child to get back to the school, the Commission issued notice to the Principal of Bhubaneswar Model School on 9.11.15
4. On 12.11.15, the Commission heard from the Child and father ,but did not allow the Mother to be heard, though she was involved in the case and victim of the rough behaviour of the authority of the school.
5. After around one month on 10.12.15, the two-member Commission heard the case inviting both the parties. Interestingly, the Commission did not allow the representative of the petitioner to plead their case, in spite of several requests.
6. On 16.12.15, the Commission again issued notice for hearing of the case. The petitioners approached the Commission to allow their representative to plead the case. While the Commission turned down the request of the petitioner, but allowed the representative of the School Authority. The Case was heard and nothing happened.
7. The Commission verbally told the parents that the case to be heard on 28th Dec.15. But the hearing was abruptly postponed and no communication was made to the petitioner. The Commission remained silence and failed miserably to exercise their power under Right to Education Act.
a. On 20.3.15, the order of the Commission reached to the petitioner after around fourths.
Gist of the Order of the Commission
1. The Commission observed that the child has been put under unwarranted stress arising out of the violation of his rights being stopped by the School authorities to attend the school.
2. The School authority has blatantly violated the sections 16,17 and 18 of RTE Act.
3. It appears that the School has suppressed vital facts from the parent’s regarding the institution offering education to the children. The school authority could not come up with the COR ( Certificate of Recognition ) as mandated under RTE Act. The School could not produce an up-to-date CBSE affiliation. This has jeopardised the future of the children who may not be allowed to sit for the CBSE examination.
4. The Commission directed the school authority to follow the following direction.
a. To allow the child to attend class IX in the school without nurturing any malice towards him.
b. To keep the communication with the students open ad to ensure appointment of qualified counsellor for the children who face difficulties.
c. To engage special educator to cater to the special needs of the children.
5. The Director, OPEPA was also directed to ensure the child to be restored back in Class IX and to make special arrangements for the children to appear in HSE examination.
6. The Commission directed to the Director, OPEPA to ask the School authority to restrain from any coercive action against the children through notice to the School authority as suitable under the law.