ORDER
Mukul Mudgal, J.
1. This writ petition was filed by the students studying in classes VIth, VIIth and VIIIth through their parents studying in Army Public School, the Ist respondent and in essence challenges the discontinuance of French Language class in the Army Public School, respondent No.1. This decision to discontinue the French classes was taken in the managing committee meeting
of the school on 2nd January, 1998, and is stated to violate provisions of Delhi School Education Act and Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Though the respondent No. 1 to sustain the impugned decision has relied upon an inspection carried by the Director, Military Training and has stated that the discontinuance of French language classes was for bringing about uniformity in Army Public School, branches of which are situated all over the country so as to obviate the inconvenience caused due to transfers from one Army School to another it is nor necessary not permissible to go into this aspect in the writ proceedings.
2. This judgment is therefore confined to the discussions to the legal pleas raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Section 3(3) of the Act. He has contended that the Act, as amended in 1987 forbids the creation or abolition of any class/section without the permission of the education authorities. The said Section reads as follows:
“3(3) On and from the commencement of this Act and subject to the provisions of clause (1) of article 30 of the Constitution, the
establishment of a new school or the opening of a class or a section or the closing down of an existing class or any section of an existing class in any existing school in Delhi shall be subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder and any school or higher class established or opened otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act shall not be recognised by the appropriate authority.”
3. The learned counsel has further contended that the phrase ‘class/section’ used in the said Section 3(3) covers even a subject like French. In support of this plea he has relied upon the fact that in class VIth, VIIth and VIIIth there are two to three sections where all the students are studying French. He further contended that discontinuance of the French language tantamounts to discontinuance of a class/section and is forbidden by the mandate of Section 3(3) of the Act. He also relied upon the dictionary meaning of ‘class’ in this regard which reads as follows:
class a lesson or lecture, a number of pupils taught together, a category, kind or type, members of which share common characteristics, a grade or standard, any of the social groupings into which people fall according to their job, wealth etc.
4. In my opinion while the dictionary meaning relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner may to a limited extent seemingly support the petitioner’s plea, yet a closer examination reveals the fallacy in the plea of the petitioner. The Act has to be construed in the context of imparting of education and the purpose behind the enactment which is stated to be an
Act to provide for better organisation and development of school education in the Union Territory of Delhi and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
5. The purpose behind the enactment of section was to avoid a situation leading to the abolition of certain classes/sections in a school leading to wholesale removal of students from the rolls of the school. Even the creation of new class/section of school has to be after the permission. This is obviously to ensure that there is no proliferation of classes/section
without the necessary infra structure to impart quality education.
6. It is not in dispute that the following classes/sections
—————————————————
S.No. Class Section(s) No of Students
studying French
---------------------------------------------------
1. VI F 38
2. VI G 40
3. VI H 41
4. VII F 38
5. VII G 36
6. VIII E 39
7. VIII F 38
8. IX J 24
9. X J 25
the students of which classes were studying French, have continued in the Army Public School and these classes/sections have not been abolished and it is also not in dispute that the number of students in this class have not been disturbed/reduced in any manner except the fact that the study of the French language has been discontinued by the Army Public
School.
7. This Court in writ jurisdiction is not concerned with the desirability and the logic behind the discontinuance of a particular subject because the school’s decision may be based on administrative exigencies which a writ court is not competent to adjudicate upon. The petitioner’s plea that a large number of students studying French may be inconvenienced may have some justification but that justification is incapable of redressal in the present proceedings.
8. However, this Court has been assured by the learned counsel for respondent No. 1 that the Army Public School would adopt adequate measures to see that no inconvenience is caused to the students due to the discontinuance of the French subject. In fact the circular dated 4th March, 1998 issued by the Army Public School states that those students who have opted for the French subject will not be disturbed in the present session. It was also not disputed before this Court that a student who opts to continue studying French language on his will own not be refused permission to appear in the Board Examinations for the French subject.
9. With the above observations, the writ stands dismissed of with no order as to costs.