Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan – Press Note

Mr. Justice Jayant Patel of Gujarat High Court issued notice today to the (1) Union of India – Ministry of Human Resources,(2) State of Gujarat – Department of Primary education and (3) Municipal School Board of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to show cause as to why the petition filed by Naya Gujarat Sewa Mandal through its Chairman Dr. Habibkhan Pathan praying for release of grant to the school under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan should not be admitted. The notice is made returnable on 17-11-2008.

Appearing for the petitioner, advocates Dr.Mukul Sinha and Shri S.H. Iyer submitted to the court that the Government of India with a view to achieve the laudable objects of fundamental Right of Primary Education to all the children of the country in the age group of 6 to 14 years guaranteed by the newly inserted Article 21-A to the Constitution of India, floated a scheme namely Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. The primary aim of this scheme is to bring back the children who due to their socio-economic conditions were either unable to go to the schools or were drop outs and ensure primary education to all such children of the country by the end of 2010. The scheme is to be implemented by the local authority with the  grant paid by the centre to all the states.

In Gujarat, particularly in the district of Ahmedabad, unfortunately, the benefits of the laudable scheme are not extended to the children of Muslim community living in the slums. The petitioner Naya Gujarat Sewa Mandal carried out a survey and found that in the area of Danilimda Chandola lake alone there were more than 2500 children in the age group of 6 to 14 years who had either never gone to the schools or were drop outs and were working in garages, tea stalls, or as footpath vendors. The petitioner submitted an application to the authority with the list of 490 such children for starting school under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. While the authority sanctioned the school, however, did not release the grant. The petitioner started the school in June 2008 anticipating  grant and continued to incur expenditure on payment of salary to the teachers and other expenses. Ultimately by communication dated 10-9-2008 the local authority refused to pay the grant on the ground that the children found in the school were different than those named in the list. The petitioner replied that the Chandola lake was filled with Narmada water and consequently, around 1500 hutments were shifted elsewhere and therefore, the petitioner had included new children from amongst 2500 children.

The advocates urged the court that if the grant was not released, the dream of the children, particularly of those belonging to the Muslim community to get primary education guaranteed by Article 21-A of the Constitution of India, would be shattered and they would be once again forced to work either as child labour or indulge in criminal activities. The consequential effect in long run would be on the entire society which shall be burdened with the large number of criminals.