Supreme Court of India
AVINASH MEHROTRAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
- Citation
- 2009 INSC 489
- Decided
- 13 April 2009
- Disposal
- Disposed off
- Bench
- DALVEER BHANDARI
Holding
The right to education under Articles 21 and 21‑A includes the provision of safe schools, and the State must enforce the safety standards prescribed in the National Building Code of India, 2005, for all schools.
Summary
The petition arose after a fire in a thatched‑roof school in Kumbakonam killed 93 children, highlighting the unsafe conditions of many Indian schools. The petitioner sought directions that every school provide education in safe premises, invoking Articles 21, 21‑A and 51‑A(k) of the Constitution. The Court examined whether the constitutional right to education includes a right to safety and whether the State must enforce the National Building Code of India, 2005, in schools. Relying on earlier judgments that expanded the scope of Articles 21 and 21‑A, the Court held that safe schools are an essential component of the right to education. It directed all State and Union Territory governments to ensure school buildings comply with the Code, install fire‑extinguishing equipment within six months, and file affidavits of compliance. The order also mandated periodic structural evaluations, training of staff, and disciplinary action for dereliction of duty. The petition was allowed and the Court issued detailed directions to implement safety standards in schools.
Issues considered
- The scope of Articles 21, 21‑A and 51‑A(k) with respect to the right to safe school premises.
- Whether the State is constitutionally obligated to enforce the National Building Code of India, 2005, in all schools.
- Whether the directions issued under Article 32 constitute a valid exercise of judicial power.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of Indias. Article 21, s. Article 21-A, s. Article 51-A(k)
Subjects
right to educationschool safetyfire safetyNational Building Codefundamental rightspublic interest litigationschool infrastructureArticle 21Article 21-AArticle 51-A(k)
Judgment
~-i
[2009] 5 S.C.R. 913
AVINASH MEHROTRA A
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(Writ Petition (c) No. 483 of 2004)
;.
) APRIL 13, 2009
B
[DALVEER BHANDARI AND LOKESHWAR SINGH
PANTA, JJ.]
CONSTITUTION OF /NOIA, 1950:
c
Articles 21, 21-A, 51-A(K) - Right to receive education
free from fear of security and safety - Held: Is the
fundamental right of each and every child - Right to
;.
education incorporates the provision of safe schools -
Articles 21 and 21-A require that children are provided
D
education in safe schools - State Governments and Union
Territories directed to ensure that schools adhere to basic
safety standards and school buildings are safe and secured
according to the safety norms prescribed by the National
Building Code - Affidavits of compliance to be filed by
authorities concerned - Public Interest Litigation - National E
Building Code of India, 2005 - Part IV - Fire and Life Safety
in Educational Institutions.
··~
In a thatched-roof school building, which housed 900
students, a fire broke out in which 93 children were burnt F
alive and several others got injured. The said building
had a single entrance and exit, a narrow stairway and
windowless classrooms. The instant writ petition was
filed under Public Interest Litigation in order to protect
school children against similar future tragedies and to G
'--'\ improve the conditions of the schools in the country. The
Court issued notices to the Union of India, State
Governments and the Union Territories. Twenty seven
States and Union Territories filed affidavits admitting that
913 H
914 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R.
)' 4
A many schools did not meet even the self-determined
safety standards which itself were far below in standards
of the National Building Code of India, 2005.
Directh1g the petition to be listed again, the Court
B
•
HELD: 1.1. In the years since the inclusion of Article ~
21A in the Constitution of India, the Court has clarified
that the right to education attaches to the individual as
an inalienable human right. Education remains essential
to the life of the individual, as much as health and dignity,
c and the St.ate must provide it, comprehensively and
completely, in order to satisfy its highest duty to citizens.
[Para 26] [927-0-G]
Unni Krishnan, J.P. & Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh
~ '
D & Ors. (1993) 1 SCC 645, R.D. Upadhyay v. State of A.P. &
Ors. AIR 2006 SC 1946, Election Commission of India Vs.
St. Mary's School & Ors. (2008) 2 SCC 390 and Bandhua
Mukti Morcha V. Union of India & Ors., (1997) 10 SCC 549,
relied on.
E 1.2. Unlike other fundamental rights, the right to
education places a burden not only on the State (Article
21-A), but also on the parent or guardian of every child,
and on the child herself (Article 51-A(k). The Constitution
directs both burdens to achieve one end: the compulsory
F education of children, free from the fetters of cost, f
parental obstruction, or State inaction. The two articles
also balance the relative burdens on parents and the
State. Parents sacrifice for the education of their children,
by sending them to school for hours of the day, but only
G with a commensurate sacrifice of the State's resources.
The right to education, then, is more than a human or
fundamental right. It is a reciprocal agreement between r-·
the State and the family, and it places an affirmative
burden on all participants in our civil society. [Paras 27
•
H and 29] [927-H; 928-A, 0-E]
-
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 915
2.1. The right to education incorporates the provision A
of safe schools. It is the fundamental right of each and
every child to receive education free from fear of security
and safety. The children cannot be compelled to receive
education in an unsound and unsafe building. Articles 21
J
and 21-A of the Constitution require that India's children B
receive education in safe schools. In order to given effect
to the provisions of the Constitution, it must be ensured
that schools in the country adhere to basic safety
standards without further delay. [Para 32, 38 and 39] [929-
E; 935-D-F] C ·
2.2. In view of the importance of Article 21A, it is
imperative that the education which is provided to
children in the primary schools should be in the
environment of safety. Educating a child requires more
than a teacher and a blackboard, or a classroom and a D
book. The right to education requires that a child studies
in a quality school, and a quality school certainly should
pose no threat to a child's safety. [Para 30 and 34] (928-
G-H; 929-A]
E
Kharak Singh vs. State of U.P. and others, AIR 1963 SC
1295 and Ashoka Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India and
others (2008) 6 sec 1, relied on.
2.3. The Constitution provides meaning to the word F
"education" beyond its dictionary meaning. Parents
should not be compelled to send their children to
dangerous schools, nor should children suffer
compulsory education in unsound buildings. Likewise,
the State's reciprocal duty to parents begins with the
provision of a free education, and it extends to the State's G
regulatory power. No matter where a family seeks to·
educate its children, the State must ensure that children
suffer no harm in exercising their fundamental right and
civic duty. States thus bear the additional burden of
, regulation, ensuring that schools provide safe facilities H
916 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R.
r4
A as part of a compulsory education. [Para 31] [929-B-D]
2.4. In view of what has happened in the particular
school and other incidents which have been enumerated
in the judgment, it has become imperative that each
school must follow the bare minimum safety standards, ..
B
in addition to the compliance of the National Building
Code of India, 2005, in particular, Part IV - Fire & Life
Safety and the Code of Practice of Fire Safety in
Educational Institutions (IS 14435:1997) of the Bureau of
Indian Standards as enumerated in the judgment. The
c Union of India and State Governments have already filed
wide ranging plans to improve school safety under
State's policy to fulfill the Constitutional mandate. Along
with the National Building Code, a combination of better
part of these plans would bring the schools in the country '
D to an adequate level of safety. [Para 35 and 36] [930-C;
934-D-E]
2.5. It has become imperative to direct that safety
measures as prescribed by the National Building Code
E of India, 2005 be implemented by all government and
private schools functioning in our country. It is, therefore,
directed that:-
(i) Before granting recognition or affiliation, the
concerned State Governments and Union Territories are r
F directed to ensure that the buildings are safe and secured
from every angle and they are constructed according to
the safety norms incorporated in the National Building
Code of India.
G (ii) All existing government and private schools shall
install fire extinguishing equipments within a period of six
months. ,,__
(iii) The school buildings be kept free from
inflammable and toxic material. If storage is inevitable,
H
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 917
.. i
they should be stored safely. A
(iv) Evaluation of structural aspect of the school may
be carried out periodically. The engineers and officials
must strictly follow the National Building Code. The safety
...
certificate be issued only after proper inspection. B
J
Dereliction in duty must attract immediate disciplinary
action against the concerned officials.
(v) Necessary training be imparted to the staff and
other officials of the school to use the fire extinguishing
equipments. [Para 40) [935-G-H; 936-A-F] c
2.6. The petition would be listed on 7.12.2009 to
ensure compliance of the order. The Education
> Secretaries of each State and Union Territories are
directed to file an affidavit of compliance of this order D
within one month after installation of fire extinguishing
equipments. [Para 41] [936-F-G]
Case Law Reference:
(1993) 1 sec 645 relied on Para 24 E
AIR 2006 SC 1946 relied on Para 26
(2008) 2 sec 390 relied on Para 26
-i (1997) 10 sec 549 relied on Para 26 F
AIR 1963 SC 1295 relied on Para 30
(2008) 6 sec 1 relied on Para 30
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No.
483 of 2004. G
'-' Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India
Colin Gonsalves, Anandeshwar Gautam and Prashant
H
918 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 5 S.C.R. ~ ...
A Kumar for the Petitioner.
Vikas Singh, ASG, Binu Tamta, Sushma Suri, Anil Katiyar,
Chandan Kumar (for Gopal Singh), Manish Kumar, Ansar
Ahmad Chaudhary, Satya Prakash, Promila Matta, Mukesh K.
Giri, Rajesh Srivastava, Ramesh Babu M.R., Tara Chandra
•
B l
Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Kishan Datta, Riku Sharma (for
Corporate Law Group), Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, A.
Mariarputham, Aruna Mathur (for Arputham, Aruna & Co.),
Abhijit P. Medh, Janaranjan Das, Swetaketu Mishra, Amit Kr.
Chawla (for Sanjay R. Hedge), V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotle,
c Praburama Subramanina, Ranjan Mukherjee, Anil Shrivastav,
K.N. Madhusoodhanan, R. Sathish, Rachana Srivastava, Mohd.
Norrullah, Gopal Prasad, Garvesh Kabra, Shrish Kr. Misra,
Puskerin, Anuvrat Sharma, Ms. Niranjana Singh, D. Bharathi
4
Reddy, T.V. George, Anil Katiyar, Pinky, Somnath (for
D Hemantika Wahi), G. Prakash, Kh. Nobin Singh, David Rao,
S.Biswajit Meitei, Vijay Prakash, Rekha Pandey (for D.S.
Mahra), U. Hazarika, Satya Mitra, Sumita Hazarika, Sanjay V.
Kharde Naresh Kumar Sharma and Asha Gopalan Nair for the
Respondents.
E
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DALVEER BHANDARI, J. 1. This important Public
Interest Litigation relates to a fire swept through the Lord
Krishna Middle School in District Kumbakonam in the city of -1
F Madras, Tamil Nadu. The fire started in the school's kitchen
while cooks were preparing mid-day meal. In order to protect
the rights of life and education guaranteed to all school going
children under Articles 21 and 21-A, the petitioner has prayed
this Court to bring about safer school conditions.
G
2. It is alleged that Lord Krishna Middle School is one of
_.i_~
the thousands of private schools that have sprung up in
response to drastic cuts in government spending on education.
This building houses more than 900 students in a crowded,
H thatched-roof building with a single entrance, a narrow stairway,
~-! AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 919
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
windowless classrooms and only one entrance and exit. A
3. The fire had sparked by dry coconut leaves used as
firewood in a nearby makeshift kitchen with thatched-roof. The
~
fire had started when the cooks were preparing mid-day meal
under a Mid-day meal scheme popular in Tamil Nadu. It is
) B
alleged that the ventilation of the entire school building was
extremely poor with only cement-perforated windows. It took
sufficient time for the fire fighters on a crane to break these
windows and rescue the few children they could with severe
bum injuries. The kitchen fire rose so high that the thatched roof
of the classrooms caught fire and the blazing roof supported c
by bamboo poles collapsed on the school children and most
of them died on the spot.
~
> 4. The nearby residents started dousing the flames and
trying to rescue children. The school's narrow, steep stairs and D
few exists apparently hampered those efforts. The crowd of
volunteer rescuers ended up blocking the main door as they
tried to help.
5. According to rules, a government-certified engineer is
E
supposed to visit these schools once every two years and
issue a "stability certificate" if the building is found to be in
good condition and all safety precautions are met. The
engineer can refuse to issue the certificate if he finds the safety
-~
• measures inadequate, losing the school its licence to operate. ·
F
I 6. It is mentioned in the petition that the investigations have
revealed that the school in Kumbakonam was last inspected
three years ago. The school had a thatched roof in severe
violation of building laws. It even had a thatched kitchen close
to the thatched classrooms. The fire officials had described. the G
school as a death trap. They said that the victims had no
--~ chance of escape when the fire erupted as they were doing
their lessons on the top floor. It is alleged that the incidence of
Kumbakonam District is not the first of its kind. In the year
1995, a school prize-giving ceremony in a Northern Indian town H
920 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 5 S.C.R. )- _,
A turned to tragedy when a fire broke out, killing nearly 400
people, many of them children and teenagers. The fire was
caused by an electrical short circuit in the town of Dabwali in
the state of Haryana, about 150 miles from the National Capital.
..
7. Flagrant violation of school safety regulations continues
B I,
in the entire country even four decades after the government
pledged to enforce them after a private school building in
Madurai caves in, killing 35 school girls and injuring 137.
8. The petitioner has prayed that he has filed this petition
c with a specific objective that:
(1) each and every child of this country can receive
good education free from fear of safety and security,
(2) to ensure that more stringent rules and regulations
.. ,,..
D are framed keeping in mind the safety of the
students,
(3) to ensure that such standards of safety are at par
with the highest standards set up anywhere in the
E world; and
(4) lo ensure that such standards are in fact enforced
regularly for the safety and protection of children in
classrooms across the country.
F 9. The petitioner has submitted that the concerned building
by-laws and rules are not followed by most of the schools in
the country causing serious safety hazards for the children.
10. In this petition, it is prayed that along with the existing
G rules regarding safety, some additional rules be framed to
strengthen the laws to protect the children in school buildings ,..___
.in cases of fire and other kinds of emergencies. In the petition,
the petitioner has prayed for:
(i) Developing a manual with fire safety procedures,
H
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 921
,., ~ [DALVEER BHANDARI. J.]
and other safety precautions and distributing them A
,·\ in schools. The manual can include the ways fires
can be prevented through careful design,
management, and maintenance practice; and
ideas for limiting fire damage, and other calamities .
.. Marking clear and safe emergency evacuations. 8
J Making sure that all exists are marked clearly and
that there are no objects obstructing the Entry and
Exit of the school building.
(ii) Ensuring that the kitchen in the precincts of the
school has adequate safety mechanisms. Not
c
keeping any hazardous, inflammable material in
the school precincts. Not making school buildings
,...... with inflammable material like thatched roof, or
• I> having any exposed wires in the school.
D
(iii) Separating hazardous areas from the main school.
(iv) Ensuring that the schools are not exceeding the
limit of the students it can admit in accordance with
the facilities available for each school, ensuring
E
proper facilities like safe drinking water, toilets, first
aid boxes, proper ventilation, lighting etc. is
available to the students and the teachers.
(v) Schools must take appropriate safety measures
. f·
and an emergency response plan that delineates F
staff responsibilities, communication modes, and
training and updating procedures for all members
of the faculty, staff.and students. Assigning duties
to teachers in case of ari emergency like fire,
earthquake, flood, a mob attack etc. and training G
the staff to ensure that all safety precautions are
•·-+ followed.
.• (vi) Fire insurance coverage should ·be made
mandatory for all schools. This will also help as all
H
922 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R.
~ ..
A insurance companies will definitely inspect the
school premises before agreeing to provide ''
insurance cover, thereby ensuring adherence to the
highest safety standards by the schools.
(vii) Residential schools to have proper safety .
B .I,
measures in case of using boilers, kitchen, ensuring
that there is no leakage) while using or storing fuel,
and that it is outside the reach of children. All school
buildings must install fire extinguishing equipment
and sensor alarms in case of fires. Such alarms
c must be able to automatically intimate the nearest
local fire station so that their response times are
much quicker in case of fire.
(viii) Regular fire drills to make students aware of what -.
4
D to do in case of a fire emergency.
(ix) The States should deal with all aspects of safety
within schools pertaining to classrooms, kitchen,
laboratories, and libraries and outside schools
relating to playgrounds, swimming pools and field
E
trips.
(x) There should be a policy prescribing safety audits
in all schools vide which an assessment of the
extent to which the stipulated safety procedures for
F· a particular area/task are followed can be done.
Audits can be used to identify weaknesses in safety
norms and check compliance with set standards
and reinforce positive safe behaviour.
G (xi) The local authorities in both urban and rural areas
should be given specific directions with regard to
the safety measures by the respective State -+--·•
Government. y
11. In the petition, it is averred that the State is duty bound
H to protect and secure lives of students across the country by
I
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 923
.,--1
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
ensuring the minimum safety standards. The State is liable to A
promulgate policies, which ensure the implementation of the
safety laws and procedures laid down. The State must ensure
that the government-certified engineer visits each and every
. school at least once in two years and issued a 'stability
certificate'. if the building is found to be in good condition and B
)
all safety precautions are met. There should be strict
supervision on those engineers who can issue these kinds of
certificates. It is alleged that most of the Indian private schools
in district towns are dull, claustrophobic, cramped and often
have derelict structures with no fire safety systems, playgrounds c
or libraries. Most of these private schools in the district towns
are located in a warren of congested lanes and school
authorities often lock the gates when classes are on to keep
A children from slipping out of the school. Most of the schools in
• j.
the villages and small towns are still made of thatched roofs D
• made from coconut leaves or other cheap and easily available
materials to avoid the cost of construction in flagrant violation
of the building laws.
12. It is prayed in the petition that a committee of jurists,
legal experts and lawyers be constituted to formulate a E
comprehensive report in a time bound plan for carrying out
reforms in the safety standards as prescribed in the schools
and to direct all the schools to implement the plan, alternately
to come forward with their own plan for providing safety
-}
measures in the schools. It is further prayed that this Court F
should evolve model safety standards as a part of Article 21
and for free and fair exercise of fundamental rights under
Articles 14, 15 and 19 of the Constitution of India.
13. In this petition, we are called upon to determine what, G
if any, safety standards schools should have and how, if at all,
schools have not met those standards.
--+
14. The National Building Code of India, 2005,
promulgated by the Bureau of Indian Standards, provides
detailed instructions on how to construct fire-safe buildings. H
924 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R.
·~
A Tables and drawings set standard for schools particularly,
including number and type of fire extinguishers, quantity of water
necessary for a proper fire suppression system, and many
more, providing an engineer-tested, nationally applicable set
of standards that our schools could follow. In the introductory ~
8 materials for the Code, the Bureau of Indian Standards affirms -~
the petitioner's claim in this case:
"The hazards of fire in educational buildings can be
considerably lowered by adoption of certain predetermined
fire safety measures with regard to· proper planning of
c buildings, choice of proper materials and components,
electrical equipments and making suitable provisions for
fire d1~tection and suppression system."
,,
15. This Court issued notice to the Union of India, State •
D Governments and the Union Territories. Replies and counter
affidavits have been received from almost all the State
Governments and the Union Territories and also the Union of
India. This Court appointed Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned
Senior Advocate as Amicus Curiae. He also suggested some
E guidelines which need to be followed by all schools in the
country.
16. 27 States and Territories have filed affidavits in this
Court detailing the current safety of their schools and plans for
improvement. The States admit that many schools do not meet
F self-determined safety standards, let alone the more rigorous
standards of the National Building Code. The affidavits
generally focus on plans for improvement, rather than schools'
current conditions, because much work remain. Where States
have provided detailed counts of schools and installed safety
G features, it emerges that thousands of schools lack any fire
suppression equipment. Thousands more schools do not have
+-"
adequate emergency egress or non-inflammable roofs.
Unfortunately, most States failed to provide any quantitative data
in their affidavits. Instead these States filed vague plans for
H future renovations and piecemeal schemes to improve schools
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 925
..../ [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
safety. Little technical advice informs some of the plans, and A
few have any admitted force of law or fail-safe or follow-up
mechanism from the State Government.
17. While we applaud States' efforts to improve schools,
we find that States have done too little, too late. With the
"'
) guidance of the National Building Code and affidavits in this B
case, we view Mr. Gonsalves's brief as crystallizing a minimum
set of safety standards for schools. By their own admission,
States have not met these standards and they have welcomed
this Court's guidance in achieving improvement. We will
consider in more detail the exact standards required and relief c
sought later in this view. It is clearly borne out from the affidavits
filed by the respondents that even the basic fire extinguishing
equipments have not been installed in most of the schools.
.. Majority of the schools do not have emergency exits. The
schools must realize and properly comprehend the importance D
of the fire safety equipments, but unfortunately most of the
schools do not have fire extinguishing equipments and
consequently, the schools are not following the minimum safety
standards prescribed by the Building Code, the Bureau of
Indian Standards. E
18. Despite best intentions and frequent agreements,
these codes and safety standards rarely bind builders in law
or practice. State or local governments must enact Building
~} Codes before any may have the force of law. Some Building
F
Codes exist in law, but few states or municipalities have
enacted a standard as rigorous as the National Building Code.
Weak enforcement often then moots the enacted code's
effectiveness, no matter the Code's intent, whether fire safety
officials, routinely speak to the need for meaningful standards
G
with real enforcement.
-
'
• -+ 19. In the petition, the petitioner does not seek damages
or court's finding on culpability. The main intention of filing this
petition is to protect against similar future tragedies by
improving the conditions of the schools in our country. H
926 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R.
,_ .
A 20. Education occupies an important place in our
Constitution and culture. There has been emphasis on free and
compulsory education for children in this country for a long time.
There is a very strong historical perspective. The Hunter
Commission in 1882-83, almost 125 years ago, recommended
B Universal Education in India. It proposed to make education •
compulsory for the children.
21. The Government of India Act, 1935 provided that
'
"education should be made free and compulsory for both boys
and girls." While debating in a bill in Imperial Legislation Council
c in 1911, Shri Gopal Krishna Gokhale strongly advocated that
elementary education should be both compulsory and free.
22. Our original Framers of the Constitution placed free
and compulsory education in the Directive Principles. The un-
D amended Article 45 provided that: •
"The State shall endeavour to provide, within a
period of ten years from the commencement of this
Constitution, for free and compulsory education for all
children until they complete the age of fourteen years."
E
23. The Kothari Commission on Education set up by the
Government of India in 1966 strongly recommended free and
compulsory education for children up to 14 years. The
Commission observed that there is no other way for the poor
F to climb their way out of this predicament.
24. Education occupies a sacred place within our
Constitution and culture. Article 21A of the Constitution,
adopted in 2002, codified this Court's holding in Unni
G Krishnan, .J.P. & Others v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
(1993) 1 sec 645, in which we established a right to
education. Parliament did not merely affirm that right; the
H
Amending Act placed the right to education within the
Constitution's set of Fundamental Rights, the most cherished
principles of our society. As the Court observed in Unni --
+- •
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 927
{DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
Krishnan (supra), para 8: A
"The immortal Poet Valluvar whose Tirukkural will surpass
all ages and transcend all religious said of education:
"Learning is excellence of wealth that none destroy; To man
nought else affords reality of joy." B
25. Education today remains liberation - a tool for the
betterment of our civil institutions, the protection of our civil
liberties, and the path to an informed and questioning citizenry.
26. Then as now, we recognize education's "transcendental
c
importance" in the lives of individuals and in the very survival
of our Constitution and Republic. In the years since the inclusion
of Article 21A, we have clarified that the right to education
.. attaches to the individual as an inalienable human right. We
0
~ have _traced the broad scope of this. right in R. D. Upadhyay v.
State of A.P. & Ors. AIR 2006 SC 1946, holding that the State
must provide education to all children in all places, even in
prisons, to the children of prisoners. We have also affirmed the
inviolability of the right to education. In Election Commission
of India v. St. Mary's School & Ors. (2008) 2 SCC 390, we E
refused to allow the State to take teachers from the classroom
to work in polling places. While the democratic State has a
mandate to conduct elections, the mundane demands of
instruction superseded the State's need to staff polling places.
-~- Indeed, the democratic State may never reach its greatest F
potential without a citizenry sufficiently educated to understand
civil rights and social duties, Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union
of India & Ors., (1997) 10 SCC 549. These conclusions all
follow from our opinion in Unni Krishnan. Education remains
essential to the life of the individual, as much as health and G
dignity, and the State must provide it. comprehensively and
... +completely, in order to satisfy its highest duty to citizens.
27. Unlike other fundamental rights, the right to education
places a burden not only on the State, but also on the parent H
928 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R.
. -
A or guardian of every child, and on the child herself. Article 21A,
which reads as follows, places one obligation primarily on the
State:
''The State shall provide free and compulsory education to
all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such ,.
B
manner as the State may, by law, determine." -\
28. By contrast, Article 51A(k), which reads as follows,
places burden squarely on the parents:
c "Fundamental duties - it shall be the duty of every citizen
of India who is the parent or guardian to provide
opportunities for education to his child or, as the case may
be, ward between the age of six and fourteen years."
29. The Constitution directs both burdens to achieve one
D end: the compulsory education of children, free from the fetters
.
of cost, parental obstruction, or State inaction. The two articles
also balance the relative burdens on parents and the State.
Parents sacrifice for the education of their children, by sending
them to school for hours of the day, but only with a
E commensurate sacrifice of the State's resources. The right to
education, then, is more than a human or fundamental right. It
-
is a reciprocal agreement between the State and the family, and
it places an affirmative burden on all participants in our civil ,_
society.
F -1
30. This Court has routinely held that another fundamental
right to life encompasses more than a breath and a heartbeat.
In reflecting on the meaning of "personal liberty" in Articles 19
and 21, we have held that "that 'personal liberty' is used in the
G article as a compendious term to include within itself all the
varieties of rights which go to makeup the 'personal liberties'
of man." Kharak Singh v. State of UP. & Ors. AIR 1963 SC +- •
1295, para 16. Similarly, we must hold that educating a child
requires more than a teacher and a blackboard, or a classroom ..........
and a book. The right to education requires that a child study '
H
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 929
-~ [DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
in a quality school, and a quality school certainly should pose A
no threat to a child's safety. We reached a similar conclusion,
on the comprehensive guarantees implicit in the right to
education, only recently in our opinion in Ashoka Kumar
Thakur v. Union of India & Ors. (2008) 6 SCC 1.
.. B
>- 31. The Constitution likewise provides meaning to the word
"education" beyond its dictionary meaning. Parents should not
be compelled to send their children to dangerous schools, nor
should children suffer compulsory education in unsound
buildings. Likewise, the State's reciprocal duty to parents
begins with the provision of a free education, and it extends to
c
the State's regulatory power. No matter where a family seeks
to educate its children, the State must ensure that children suffer
no harm in exercising their fundamental right and civic duty.
:.
States thus bear the additional burden of regulation, ensuring
that schools provide safe facilities as part of a compulsory D
education.
32. In the instant case, we have no need to sketch all the
contours of the Constitution's guarantees, so we do not. We
merely hold that the right to education incorporates the E
provision of safe schools.
33. This Court in Ashoka Kumar Thakur's case (supra)
observed as under:
-~
"It has become necessary that the Government set a F
realistic target within which it must fully implement Article
21A regarding free and compulsory education for the entire
country. The Government should suitably revise budget
allocations for education. The priorities have to be set
correctly. The most important fundamental right may be G
Article 21A, which, in the larger interest of the nation, must
·-+ be fully implemented. Without Article 21A, the other
fundamental rights are effectively rendered meaningless.
--- Education stands above other rights, as one's ability to
enforce one's fundamental rights· flows from one's· H
930 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009) 5 S.C.R.
'" 4
A education. This is ultimately why the judiciary must oversee
Government spending on free and compulsory education."
34. In view of the importance of Article 21A, it is imperative
that the education which is provided to children in the primary
B schools should be in the environment of safety. ,..,
"'
35. In view of what has happened in Lord Krishna Middle
School in District Kumbakonam and other incidents which have
been enumerated in the preceding paragraphs, it has become
imperative that each school must follow the bare minimum
c safety standards, in addition to the compliance of the National
Building Code of India, 2005, in particular Part IV - Fire & Life
Safety and the Code of Practice of Fire Safety in Educational
Institutions (IS 14435:1997) of the Bureau of Indian Standards.
The said safety standards are enumerated hereinbelow: ..
D
3.1. FIRE SAFETY MEASURES IN SCHOOLS: ~
i. Provision of adequate capacity and numbers of fire
extinguishers of ISi marks to be provided in eye-
catching spots in each block of the school.
E
ii. First Aid kits and necessary mediciries should be
readily available in the school.
iii. Provision of water tank and separate piping from
F the tank with hose reel to the ground floor and first -r
floor.
iv. Fire fighting training to all teachers and students
from X to XII standards.
G V. Fire Task Force in every school comprising of Head
of the institution, two teachers I staff members and
one member from the Fire and Rescue Department
~·
s.hould be constituted. The Fire & Rescue
DepartmE:mt member shall monitor and make fire
.=--
H safety plan and conduct inspections once in every
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 931
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
three months. A
vi. Display of emergency telephone numbers and list
of persons to be contacted on the notice board and
other prominent places.
>- vii. Mock drills to be conducted regularly. Fire alarm to B
be provided in each floor and for rural schools
separate long bell arrangement in case of
emergency.
viii. All old electrical wiring and equipment shall be c
replaced with ISi mark equipments and routine
maintenance conducted by the School
Management in consultation with the Fire and
Rescue Department.
ix. No High Tension lines should run inside or in close
D
proximity to the school. Steps must be taken to shift
them if they are already there.
x. The Fire and Rescue Department shall frame
guidelines with "DOS and DON'Ts' for schools and E
issue a fitness certificate, which shall be renewed
periodically.
3.2. TRAINING OF SCHOOL TEACHERS & OTHER
STAFF:
F
i. The teachers along with other staff shall be trained
to handle safety equipment, initiate emergency
evacuations and protect their students in the event
of fire and other emergencies by the Fire and
Rescue Department. G
ii. They shall also be trained in providing emergency
first-aid treatment.
iii. There shall be a School Safety Advisory Committee H
932 SUPR,EME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R. j-, ..
A and an Emergency Response Plan drafted by the
Committee in approval and consultation with the
concerned Fire & Rescue Department.
iv. Emergency Response Drills conducted at regular
intervals to train the students as well as the school
. '
8 ~
staff.
v. All schools to observe Fire Safety Day on 14th of
April every year with awareness programs and fire
safety drills in collaboration with the Fire and
c Rescue Department.
3.3. SCHOOL BUILDING SPECIF/CATIONS:
i. The school buildings shall preferably be a 'A' Class
~
construction with brick I stone masonry walls with
D RCC roofing. Where it is not possible to provide
RCC roofing only non-combustible fireproof heat
resistance materials should be used.
ii. The nursery and elementary schools should be
E housed in single storied buildings and the maximum
number of floors in school buildings shall be
restricted to three including the ground floor.
iii. The School building shall be free from inflammable
and toxic materials, which if necessary, should be
F
stored away from the school building.
iv. The staircases, which act as exits or escape routes,
shall adhere to provisions specified in the National
Building Code of India 2005 to ensure quick
G evacuation of children.
+' •
v. The orientation of the buildings shall be in such a
way that proper air circulation and lighting is ~
available with open space all round the building as
H far as possible.
_~ AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 933
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
vi. Existing school buildings shall be provided with A
additional doors in the main entrances as well as
the class rooms if required. The size of the main
exit and classroom doors shall be enlarged if found
inadequate.
B
vii. School buildings have to be insured against fire and
natural calamities with Group Insurance of school
pupils.
viii. Kitchen and other activities involving use of fire shall
be carried out in a secure and safe location away C
from the main school building.
ix. All schools shall have water storage tanks.
3.4. CLEARANCES & CERT/FICA TES: D
i. Every School shall have a mandatory fire safety
inspection by the Fire and Rescue Services
Department followed by issuance of a 'no objection
certificate' to.. the School as a mandatory
requirement for granting permission for establishing E
or continuation of a School.
i. An Inspection Team consisting of experts like a Civil
Engineer, a Health Officer, a Revenue Officer, a
Psychologist, a Fire Officer, a local body officer and F
a development officer besides the educational
authorities shall carry inspection and assessment
of infrastructural facilities before the
commencement of each academic year. The Team
shall submit its Inspection Report to the concerned G
district Chief Educational Officer.
iii. The building plans for schools shall be prepared
only by a Government certified engineer and the
PWD Executive Engineer concerned should
inspect the building and award a structural stability H
934 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 5 S.C.R. .. -
A certificate. Stability Certificates shall be issued by
the State or Central Government Engineers only
and shall be mandatory for granting permission for
establishing or continuation of a School.
iv. In every district, one Recognition Committee "' -
B
headed by a retired judge shall be constituted.
Officials from Revenue Department, Public Works
Department, Fire Service, Electricity Board, Health
and Education Department, a reputed NGO shall be
members. They shall visit the schools periodically
c or at least the erring institutions as listed by the
Chief Education Officer.
v. Conditional recognition I approval shall never by
resorted to for any school. ..,
D
36. In this petition, we need not take any action contrary
to government policy to fulfill the Constitution's mandate. Union
and State officials have already filed wide-ranging plans to
improve school safety. Along with the National Building Code,
a combination of the better parts of these plans would bring the
E
nation's schools to an adequate level of safety. States have also
expressE~d enthusiasm for reform and some have asked this
Court expressly for direction.
37. Many States have already begun implementation. The ~-
F most forward thinking States have enacted and enforced the
National Building Code in their schools. Often these States
have also created, empowered and funded a state-wide
emergency response office. The coordinated efforts and
concentration of knowledge in these administrative units make
G States better able to prepare for emergencies, as much as to
respond once the problem has started. For example, the State
of Gujarat has established such an emergency management +" •
office. Having already settled building codes and other large ,.........._
issues, the State can focus on other aspects of emergency
H management. With the assistance of outside experts, Gujarat
AVINASH MEHROTRA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 935
~ I
[DALVEER BHANDARI, J.]
recently created a colouring book to teach children how to A
...... respond to emergencies. On a smaller scale, but no less vital,
in the Union Territory of Pondicherry, administrators replaced
all thatched roofs and allocated an additional Rs.500 lakhs to
...... build pucca classrooms. Some States have counted their
schools and know which require repairs; they provided these B
~
details in their affidavits along with detailed plans for
improvement. We are encouraged by the agreement shared
among States that safety must improve. Our order should
provide additional stimulus for the general aims of the States'
already agreed policy. c
38. In the end, we should need to do little but enforce
existing laws and encourage States in their own well-intentioned
safety programmes. However, in the years since the fire at the
" Lord Krishna Middle School, some States have moved. slowly
and safety standards have varied in quality across States. D
These delays ~nd variations have subjected millions more
, school children to danger from fire, earthquakes and other
causes, when simple enhancements could offer much greater
protection. Articles 21 and 21-A of the Constitution require that
India's school children receive education in safe schools. In E
order to give effect to the provisions of the Constitution, we must
ensure that India's schools adhere to basic safety standards
without further delay.
-k 39. It is the fundamental right of each and every child to
4. F
receive education free from fear of security and safety. The
children cannot be compelled to receive education from an
unsound and unsafe building.
40. In view of what happened in Lord Krishna Middle
School in District Kumbakonam where 93 children were burnt G
alive and several similar incidences had happened in the past,
• t
therefore, it has become imperative to direct that safety
"'""'·
~
measures as prescribed by the National Building Code of India,
2005 be implemented by all government and private schools
/ functioning in our country. H
936 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 5 S.C.R. j. -
A We direct that:- , .......,
(i) Before granting recognition or affiliation, the
concerned State Governments and Union
Territories are directed to ensure that the buildings .---
'
are safe and secured from every angle and they are
B
constructed according to the safety norms
incorporated in the National Building Code of India.
(ii) All existing government and private schools shall
install fire extinguishing equipments within a period
c of six months.
(iii) The school buildings be kept free from inflammable
and toxic material. If storage is inevitable, they
should be stored safely. -
..
D (iv) Evaluation of structural aspect of the school may be
carried out periodically. We direct that the
concerned engineers and officials must strictly
follow the National Building Code. The safety
certificate be issued only after proper inspection.
E Dereliction in duty must attract immediate
disciplinary action against the concerned officials.
(v) Necessary training be imparted to the staff and
other officials of the school to use the fire
F extinguishing equipments.
41. The Education Secretaries of each State and Union
Territories are directed to file an affidavit of compliance of this
order within one month after installation of fire extinguishing
equipments.
G
42. List this petition on 07.12.2009 to ensure compliance -;- >
of this order. ,,,,,_
,Jt-
R.P. Petition to be listed again.
H
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "right to education"Sign in to search