Goan Parents file PIL against DoE

The Department of Education has been taken to court by the All Goa Unaided Schools Parents Association (AGUSPA) for failing to implement and enforce the All Goa School Education Act, 1984 and All Goa School Education Rules, 1986. The "AGUSPA" had earlier in a meeting organised on 13 June at Margao had decided to file the PIL against the DoE for its continuous inaction to provide relief against the high handedness of unaided schools.

The rules specified in the act are enough to protect parents from arbitrary fee hikes by unaided schools. However the Education department is least bothered to implement the rules even as parents have been making demands of them to enforce the rules for the last three years. While unaided schools are required to obtain a clearance from the Director of education before the hike in fees this procedure is blatantly ignored.

It was therefore the inaction of the constituted body that forced the AGUSPA to file the PIL before the division bench of the Bombay High Court on Tuesday 23rd June 2009. The Court was requested by Jos Peter D'Souza, the counsel for the petitioner that till the date of the next hearing the DoE should not grant approval to any school to increase its fees. The Court has granted this request of the petitioner.

The petition said that every academic year, all the unaided schools are required to file audit reports before the directorate of education which ahs to be audited by them and also by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India(CAG). But the petitioner stated that this was hardly followed. Also while every school has to constitute a 15 member committee with representation from parents, teachers and management along with official of the directorate of education, this rule is also not followed. The committee is  necessary as it has to analyse the accounts and expenses of the school before the school can obtain approval for the revised fee structure. The AGUSPA has pointed out that none of the 116 unaided schools in the state have such a committee.

The matter was adjourned after two weeks as the Advocate general Subodh Kantak sought time to study the matter and the court has granted the same