An Allahabad High Court judge volunteering to pay the fees of a Dalit student for her admission to IIT-BHU in Varanasi shows that the judiciary can be deeply compassionate. A 17-year-old student Sanskriti Ranjan, who was unable to afford the fee required for getting admission to the prestigious IIT-BHU (Banaras Hindu University) after qualifying had appealed to the High Court to direct the university to waive off her fees. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh of the Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow Bench contributed Rs 15,000 for the poor SC student so that she could secure admission to the elite university.
Sanskriti had secured 95.6% marks in 10th standard and 94% marks in 12th standard. She appeared in the Joint Entrance Examination for selection to the IITs. She was successful in clearing the exam. She secured 92.77 percentile marks in JEE Mains Examination and secured a rank (2062) in the SC category. Thereafter, Sanskriti had applied for JEE Advanced on September 16, 2021, and cleared JEE Advance on October 15, 2021, with 1469 rank in the SC category.
Sanskriti was allotted a seat at IIT-BHU in Mathematics and Computing, a five-year Bachelor and Master of Technology (Dual Degree), in the counselling. However, she could not arrange the meagre amount of Rs 15,000, the fee to be paid before the scheduled date. Her financial situation had turned dire after her father was diagnosed with chronic kidney disease and had been advised a kidney transplant.
Her father has to undergo dialysis twice in a week in order to survive.
Due to ill health of her father and financial crisis created by medical expenses and Covid-19, she could not arrange the money. She and her father had written many times to the Joint Seat Allocation Authority for extension of time indicating precarious conditions for which she could not deposit the fee but received no reply.
Legal counsel who assisted Sanskriti on Court’s request brought to the notice of the High Court an interim order, dated November 22, 2021, passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.6983 of 2021: Prince Jaibir Singh vs Union of India & Ors. In that case, a candidate, Prince Jaibir Singh, a Dalit student, could not deposit the fee for seat allocation and the Supreme Court, considering the career prospects of a young Dalit student, who was on the verge of losing a valuable seat allotted to him in IIT Bombay, directed that Prince Jaibir Singh be admitted to IIT Bombay pursuant to the allocation of the seat to him by creating a supernumerary seat.
Also Read: Regulate the Asset
While hearing Sanskriti’s plea, Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh, while considering the facts of the case—where a young bright Dalit girl student had come before the High Court seeking equity jurisdiction to enable her to pursue her dream of getting admitted in the IIT—said: “This Court on its own has volunteered to contribute Rs 15,000— the fee for allocation of the seat.” As an interim measure , the judge directed the Joint Seat Allocation Authority and IIT-BHU to admit Sanskriti in Mathematics and Computing (5 years, Bachelor and Master of Technology (Dual Degree)). In case there is no seat vacant in the said discipline, the Court directed IIT-BHU to create a supernumerary post, which shall be subject to the admission of Sanskriti being regularised in the event of any seat falling vacant in future as a result of exigency which may arise in the course of admission process. The Court also said that in case no seat falls vacant, Sanskriti shall continue her studies against a supernumerary seat. The Court also directed her to report at the IIT-BHU campus within three days of the judgment, along with the relevant papers and fee in order to secure her admission in the course.
The Calcutta High Court on December 3 had said that no unaided private school could prevent any student from appearing in an examination for failing to pay at least 80% of the fees as mentioned by the Court in an earlier order. The division bench headed by Justice IP Mukerji also directed schools to issue admit cards for school exams and publish results of the students whose fees have not been paid. Last year, a division bench headed by Justice Sanjib Banerjee had asked the parents to pay 80% of the school fees. Schools were to waive 20% of tuition fees and not charge fees on heads like “laboratory, craft, sporting facilities or extra-curricular activities or the like” till in-person classes resumed. Many parents allegedly did not pay 80% of the fees.
In another decision, the Patna High Court on November 11 ruled that the demand of Chanakya National Law University (CNLU) with respect to payment of facilities fees and examination fees from students with respect to academic year 2020-2021 is “arbitrary and illegal” in view of the fact that students had not attended classes and not availed these facilities due to Covid-19.
On October 8 this year, the Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna, while expressing concern over a large number of students belonging to the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) dropping out during the pandemic as they could not afford to get necessary technology to pursue online classes, said that it amounted to the right to education being denied for all practical purposes and it is the responsibility of the government to provide them all facilities free of cost. Warning state governments against booking people for making distressed social media posts on scarcity of oxygen, essential medicines and beds for Covid-19 patients, the apex court had said on April 30, 2021, that state police and DGPs would be hauled up for contempt of court for imposing any clampdown on citizens for airing grievances on deficiencies in healthcare during the pandemic.
Also Read: Allahabad HC says few black sheep among lawyers should not end up defaming profession
During the first lockdown in 2020, Judge K Sai Rama Devi of the Sangareddy district in Telangana opened the court premises of the town to feed over hundreds of underprivileged migrants. Moved by the plight of the migrant labourers, the district judge turned a good samaritan to provide food to migrant workers and also arrange transportation to help them reach their destinations. The judge was particularly moved by the news of a barefooted elderly man collapsing on the way to his village.
Speaking at the Constitution Day celebrations organised by the Supreme Court registry, Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana, while observing that “Laxman Rekha” of separation of power is “sacrosanct”, said that at times courts are compelled to intervene in the interest of justice and the intention is to nudge the executive, and not to usurp its role and they should not be projected as targeting another institution. The CJI warned against any such attempts to project judicial interventions as targeting of the executive and said that it was “totally misplaced” and would prove detrimental to the health of democracy if encouraged.
—By Shivam Sharma and India Legal News Service