Don't shut only school in village due to unsafe building, inadequate toilets; fix it instead: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently held that the sole school in a village should not be shut down over inadequate infrastructure and safety concerns [Manggi Bai Kole & Ors. & The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.].

Instead, the local elected representatives and villagers should work together to address the deficiencies, the Court directed.

A bench of acting Chief Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal observed that while the school suffered from serious deficiencies, including unsafe classrooms, inadequate toilets and lack of drinking water, withdrawing its recognition would jeopardise the education of local children because no other government school operates in the village.

"Since this (Devarsi High School) is the only school operational within the Gram Panchayat and there is no alternative Government school available, closing down the institution would directly jeopardise the academic future of the local children. Therefore, instead of shutting down or withdrawing the recognition of the private school, constructive and coordinated efforts must be made by all stakeholders to systematically eliminate the highlighted deficiencies in the public interest," the Court ordered.

The Court passed the order on June 22 while disposing of a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by the sarpanch and up-sarpanch of Kotari panchayat in Umaria district.

They had sought cancellation of the recognition granted to Devarsi High School over alleged deficiencies in its infrastructure and functioning. They alleged that the private school lacked basic facilities required to run an educational institution.

According to the plea, students were being taught in unsafe classrooms, there were no proper toilets or drinking water facilities, classrooms lacked adequate seating and electricity, there was no playground or parking space and the school was short of teachers.

Additionally, the petitioners relied on an inquiry conducted by the block education officer and a spot inspection report, both of which highlighted several deficiencies.

The inspection committee constituted by the district education officer found that the school was operating from a thatched building with termite-infested wooden beams that could collapse at any time. It also recorded that classrooms were overcrowded, toilet facilities were temporary and unsuitable, blackboards were poorly maintained, classrooms were inadequately lit, electrical arrangements were unsafe, children had to fetch drinking water from a public hand pump outside the campus, there was no playground or parking facility and the school lacked sufficient subject-wise teachers.

The committee also noted that teachers were allegedly being paid in cash and that the management had failed to produce documents relating to the school's recognition when asked.

However, the High Court noted that the petitioners themselves were the sarpanch and up-sarpanch of the gram panchayat and bore responsibility towards improving educational and civic facilities in the village.

"The petitioners, being the Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kotari, Janpad Panchayat Manpur, owe a public duty to facilitate education and ensure better civic amenities for the villagers and their children," observed the Court.

Accordingly, the court directed the gram panchayat to place the issue before its general body meeting and pass a resolution identifying how the deficiencies could be addressed with the active participation of local residents. It also directed the petitioners to file a compliance report supported by affidavits showing the steps taken to implement the directions.

Additionally, the Court underscored the role of PILs as a means to secure practical solutions rather than merely punitive action.

"There should be a constructive approach while dealing with PIL by the High Court, and while doing so, even the petitioner can be directed to do certain activities in public interest, which they claim to have done in the past," said the Court.

The Court ultimately disposed the concerned PIL.

Advocates Munendra Singh and Vineeta Soni represented the petitioners.

Deputy Advocate General appeared for the State.

[Read Order]