I just wish to add my concern, what if Disabled children could speak for themselves. Only enrolment without enabling infrastructures will compound the pain of little kids. in childhood when peer classmates say: 'andha? langda? bahra?' we can't conceive what it feels to children with disabilities. mental trauma coupled with physical unease drives them to hate their disabilities. sign language is not used at 99 per cent schools and colleges so what will hearing impaired children will do in such so called mainstream schools? On 3/14/14, Asudani, Rajesh <rajeshasud...@rbi.org.in> wrote: > Frankly, I think today's education has become so much graphical that no > teacher in mainstream schools would be able to teach blind students. > I don't comment about other disabilities. > So, we are pushing totally blind children into educational hell by forcibly > procuring admissions for them in normal schools... > > Special teachers of SSA are not a panacea and just serve a symbolic function > of meeting special needs... > > Long live inclusive education.. > I have long maintained that special schools at primary level and integration > thereafter with full supportive services is the need of the hour.. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: AccessIndia [mailto:accessindia-boun...@accessindia.org.in] On Behalf > Of SC Vashishth > Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 11:26 AM > To: AccessIndia: a list for discussing accessibility and issues concerning > the disabled.; Flight we the PwD > Subject: Re: [AI] Need your urgent views on implementing reservation > provisions for RTE > > Thank you Harish for these two important points. We need to see that > minimum 3% doesn't become maximum 3% and 3% reservation should not come in > the way of the fundamental right of Free and compulsory education in an > appropriate setting conducive to all children with disability (no > restriction in terms of percentage). > > I am pasting the last two orders of the court in the matter i.e. order of > 21 Feb 2014 and 26 Feb 2014 for your info. The High court has now impleaded > the Chief Commissioner for advice and today the Commissioner office has > called in a meeting of the senior officials of the Education department > (Delhi Govt), Min. of Social justice & HRD etc to discuss the issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 1225/2014 and CM > Appl.2556/2014 PRAMOD ARORA ..... Petitioner versus HONBLE LT. > GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. > JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR O R D E > R 21.02.2014 Issue notice. Ms Zubeda Begum, Adv. accepts > notice and states that she will take instruction having regard to the > section 62 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, > Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act read with the National > Trust for the Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental > Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999. It is contended by the > petitioner that the proposal promoted by the Govt. of NCT to earmark 3% > under the 1995 Act is inadequate since that quota or sub-quota will almost > certainly get exhausted given the nature of applications of students with > other disabilities and the clubbing with the 25% of the > quota. Furthermore the clubbing with the 25% economical weaker groups > (EWS) would also subsume or entirely extinguish the claim of the > special children to their right to education. The respondents shall > file their counter affidavit within a week and the Central Government?s > counter affidavit shall indicate steps taken pursuant to 1999 Act in > particular the funding mechanism provided thereunder and the > categorisation of various disabilities for the purpose of granting its > benefit. The petitioner?s contend that at the moment 43 odd schools > have infrastructure to cater to the educational needs of such special > children and have in the past admitting 3 or 4 applicants in each batch. > It is submitted that as interim measure - these particulars have been > furnished as Annexure B ? may be allowed to give three seats. It is > indicated that in any event if the petitioners do not succeed at the final > stage such seats can be released in accordance with the scheme to the wait > listed candidates. List on 25th February, 2014. Dasti under > signature of the Court Master. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J R.V.EASWAR, > J FEBRUARY 21, 2014* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 1225/2014 PRAMOD > ARORA ..... Petitioner versus HONBLE LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND > ORS ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA > BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR O R D E R 26.02.2014 1. > During the course of hearing, learned Standing Counsel for the Central > Government has produced a letter dated 25.2.2014, which seeks to clarify > the decision with regard to the 3% quota earmarked under the Persons with > Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full > Participation) Act, 1995. 2. Learned counsel for the parties had urged > that a change had been brought about by the amendment to the Right of > Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 by amending Act, 2012, > especially Sections 2 (d) and 2(ee) r/w Section 3(iii). 3. Moreover, > learned counsel for the petitioner had argued that the change does not in > any manner affect or seek to affect the right of children with > disabilities under the 1995 Act, especially Section 26 and 39 and that the > 3% quota earmarked in the said 1995 Act would prevail over and above the > 25% quota amended by the RTE Act. 4. Learned counsel for Government of > NCT argued that the 3% quota would have to be split up within the 25% > quota by way of horizontal reservation and the balance within the 75% open > category. 5. The letter dated 25.2.2014 instructing the counsel in this > regard at one stage states that private schools can earmark seats for > children with disability within the 75% quota, but at a later stage, > favourably it also states that appointment of children with disability as > a disadvantaged group is an enabling provision and would not be > a reservation one and that the sub-categorization of 75% reservation > under Section 12(i)(c) of the RTC Act is within the domain of the > State. 6. Apparently, the Central Government and the Government of NCT > appear to point out the same objective, although they are doing so in a > diverse manner. 7. This Court is of the opinion that before proceeding > further and ruling upon the feasibility of a horizontal reservation within > the 25% quota earmarked for EWS category students, and allocating 3% from > 75% which can be suitably notified by the concerned unaided schools, > the State Government should having regard to the total number of intake > of all the private schools, work out the available 3% quota as a whole > and also indicate which schools are equipped to deal with what kind of > disability, keeping in mind the sub-categorization in Section 2(i) of the > 1995 Act. To illustrate, if the total intake of seats for a given year is > in the range of one thousand, the disability quota would be 3%, i.e. 30 > seats, which would, for each of the seven sub-categories in 2(i), work > out to 4 seats. 8. The Government of NCT before carrying out the > exercise should indicate which schools are geared up to cater to the > concerned disability, i.e. sight disability, hearing impairment, > locomotive disability, blindness and the other categories mentioned in > Section 2 (ee)(B) of the 2012 Amendment to the Right to Education > Act. 9. This is in order to facilitate a broad scheme whereby the seats > are specifically earmarked having regard to the facilities in that school > so that the highest concentration of students to be admitted from > such category are admitted to the concerned institutions. 10. The > Central Government shall indicate the funds available in terms of the > various schemes under the National Trust for Welfare of > Persons Disabilities Act, 1999 and the trusts created under that Act as > well as the existing schemes formulated by it in that regard. 11. The > Court is of the opinion that for a fuller appreciation of the issues which > are likely to arise in the present proceedings, it would be essential to > implead the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Ministry of > Social Justice and Empowerment, Sarojni House, 6, Bhagwan Das Road, New > Delhi. 12. It is clarified that the reference to reservation for > disabilities in the previous order was 3% and the reference to Section 62 > was inadvertent, the correct provision being Section 26. 13. The > quota of the 1995 Act shall be kept vacant to await the outcome of the > final decision in this case. 14. List on 12th March, 2014 for further > proceeding/hearing. 15. Dasti under the signatures of the Court > Master. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J R.V.EASWAR, J FEBRUARY 26, 2014* > > > > On 14 March 2014 10:04, Kotian, H P <hpkot...@rbi.org.in> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> The disabled children should have higher privelledges in securing seats >> on >> the grounds of: >> 1 Infra structure at the school conducive to them >> 2 Distance factor and infra structure fascilities commuting to school. >> Harish Kotian >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: AccessIndia [mailto:accessindia-boun...@accessindia.org.in] On >> Behalf Of SC Vashishth >> Sent: 13 March 2014 19:47 >> To: Flight we the PwD; AI List >> Cc: Ad Subhash Chandra Vashishth >> Subject: [AI] Need your urgent views on implementing reservation >> provisions for RTE >> >> A matter bearing Number W.P.(C) 1225/2014 titled Pramod Arora Vs. UOI & >> Ors. is pending in the High Court of Delhi regarding Admission of >> Children >> with Disabilities in Schools in Delhi particularly under the Right to >> Education Act. This includes the 75% paid +25% (freeship quota for >> disadvantaged) to be respected by Private schools under the RTE Act. >> >> When there are more number of students before the private schools (mostly >> the number is more than the vacancies in the schools) there is a draw of >> lots among the eligible students - in both the 25% reserved categories >> and >> 75% general paid categories. The Govt. refunds certain portion of the fee >> etc to the private schools for those admitted under the 25% quota in the >> private schools. >> >> Now in this draw of lots the situation is that many disabled children get >> left out - due to direct and indirect discrimination and sometimes due to >> just the system in place. The Act provides for free and compulsory >> education for the disabled children up to the age of 18 years and 14 >> years >> for non-disabled children. >> >> I solicit your urgent views on how to ensure maximum children with >> disabilities could be admitted in not only government but also private >> schools with appropriate environment conducive to them. Also the manner >> of >> effecting reservation in education in light of PWD Act. >> >> I need the views by 1 PM tomorrow i.e. by 14 March 2014 >> >> >> -- >> Warm regards, >> >> Subhash Chandra Vashishth >> Advocate >> Mobile: +91 (11) 9811125521 >> Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Consider >> environment! >> >> > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > > Caution: The Reserve Bank of India never sends mails, smses or makes calls > asking for personal information like your bank account details, passwords, > etc. It never keeps or offers funds to anyone. Please do not respond in any > manner to such offers, however official or attractive they may look. > > Notice: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are > addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, > review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in > this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you > have received this email by error, please notify us by return e-mail or > telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any > attachments. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for > the presence of viruses. The Reserve Bank of India accepts no liability for > any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. > > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. >
-- Avinash Shahi M.Phil Research Scholar Centre for The Study of Law and Governance Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi India Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
