Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Decongestion move taken to court

Decongestion: Let’s see how it works: CJ
Parent Seeks Quashing Of GO n Traffic Case Hearing In July
The Times of India

Bangalore: Is the government right in prohibiting students of centrally located schools in Bangalore from commuting in private vehicles?

A public interest petition against the directive, filed by K.K. Shrinivas of Kasturinagar (Bangalore East), a parent of three children, was admitted for preliminary hearing by the High Court Division Bench comprising Chief Justice N.K. Sodhi and Justice B.S. Patil on Monday.

The court issued notices to the chief secretary, additional secretary (education) and commissioner of police.
While admitting the petition, Justice Sodhi observed: “Let the system run. The idea is to decongest roads. Let’s see how it works. When I travel home I see traffic jams at signals.”

The court will hear the case on July 28.

Shrinivas in his petition sought quashing of the government circular dated May 27 which made it mandatory for all students to use the public transport and prohibited them from commuting in private vehicles exercising powers under Section 133 of the Karnataka Education Act.

This decongestion exercise will begin from July 1.
The petitioner said his children aged below 10 years travelled to private unaided schools — St Anthony’s Primary School and Sacred Heart Girls’ High School, Residency Road. The petitioner was taking his children and another neighbour’s child in his car. But the government circular which was made applicable to only 16 unaided schools prohibits him from taking his children to school in his vehicle under his care and protection. The user of public transport which did not allow parental care and supervision was illegal and did not ensure safety to the children. The respondents had no authority to impose restrictions on the user of private vehicles and Section 133 of the Education Act did not confer such authority to pass such an order.

The petitioner contended that the order was discriminatory as it applied to only 16 schools and was unconstitutional.


Post a Comment

<< Home