Madhya Pradesh High Court Ruling on Village School Infrastructure
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has mandated that the only school in a village should remain operational despite concerns over inadequate infrastructure and safety issues. In the case of Manggi Bai Kole & Ors. vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., the Court emphasized that the closure of the school could severely impact the education of local children, as no alternative government school exists in the area.
Court’s Observations and Directions
The bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal, noted the numerous deficiencies at Devarsi High School, including unsafe classrooms, insufficient toilets, and lack of drinking water. However, the Court highlighted the need for a collaborative approach between local representatives and villagers to address these issues rather than withdrawing the school’s recognition.
“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 jeopardize the academic future of the local children,” the Court stated. It urged all stakeholders to work together to rectify the deficiencies in the public interest.
Details of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
The decision arose from a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by the sarpanch and up-sarpanch of the Kotari Panchayat in Umaria district. The petitioners sought to have the school’s recognition canceled due to alleged infrastructure failings. The petition cited unsafe classrooms, inadequate toilets, lack of drinking water, insufficient seating, absence of a playground, and insufficient teachers, among other issues.
An inspection by the block education officer and a subsequent spot inspection report corroborated these claims, revealing that the school operated from a thatched building with termite-infested beams, and lacked essential facilities. The inspection committee also found issues such as overcrowded classrooms, temporary toilet facilities, unsafe electrical arrangements, and inadequate lighting.
More Read
High Court’s Critique and Directions
The High Court criticized the petitioners, who are the local sarpanch and up-sarpanch, for not taking responsibility to improve educational and civic amenities in their 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,” the Court observed.
The Court directed the gram panchayat to discuss the matter in a general body meeting and devise a resolution to address the deficiencies, with active involvement from local residents. The petitioners were also instructed to submit a compliance report supported by affidavits detailing the steps taken to implement the Court’s directions.
Emphasis on Constructive Solutions
Moreover, the Court underscored the importance of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) in securing practical solutions rather than merely punitive actions. “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,” the Court noted.
The PIL was ultimately disposed of, with advocates Munendra Singh and Vineeta Soni representing the petitioners, and the Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State.
