(f)that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.
51A.Fundamental duties.- It shall be the duty of every citizen of India -
......
(j)to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement.
(k)who is a 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."
15.In formulating the First National Policy on Education, a resolution was issued by the Government of India based on the Report of the Education Commission. Paragraph 15 emphasised the importance of games and sports, which are as follows:
"(15)Games and Sports.
Games and sports should be developed on a large scale with the object of improving the physical fitness and sportsmanship of average student as well as of those who excel in this department. Where playing field and other facilities for developing a nation-wide programme of physical education do not exist, these should be provided on a priority basis." (Emphasis added)
16.The first Commission which was headed by Professor D.S.Kothari, (the then Chairman of the University Grants Commission, New Delhi), gave its report on 29.6.1966. The Commission in paragraphs 8.88 to 8.93 dealt with the Physical Education. Paragraph 8.91 reads as follows:
"8.91.As the child grows into the preadolescent stage, his interests and capacity change and physical education should provide for more challenging activities, opportunities for simple team play and finer forms of skills. The adolescent in the secondary school desires to imitate the activities of the adults, and he should be given sports, games and athletics in their standard form. Skills learnt earlier should be perfected through guidance and practice. It is an age when boys and girls desire excellence and the physical education syllabus must include techniques for good performance."
17.If it is seen in the context of these constitutional guarantees and recommendations of experts on the field, physical education for children cannot be minimised. It was preciously for this reason, the authorities empowered to grant recognition to schools insisted on providing play grounds as an essential condition for the grant of affiliation or recognition. Even in places where no such facilities are available in any school, an agreement in which the said facilities are made available to the children was sought for by the department. The increasing interest shown by the school children over national sports events will show the growing enthusiasm and attraction over such sports. May be it is for this reason even in the admission for professional courses started giving sports quota for eminent sportsmen so that the sports activities will grow into higher level.
18.If it is seen in such backdrop, then categorization of children belonging to different school Boards will become meaningless. So far as the Constitution is concerned, it does not recognize any distinction between different streams of school education. All the children from the age group of 4 to 14 have been treated as a single class. Whatever may be the circumstances existed, the State Board had permitted the children belonging to CBSE school to participate in their events till 2007-2008. The reason for dispensing with the said participation had not been sufficiently explained. Some untenable reasons projected by the State if allowed will go beyond the constitutional mandate.
19.The contention made by the State that the CBSE students will have double benefit cannot stand to reason because the purpose for which eminent sports quota has been created is only to develop sports. The object is to encourage sports and only eminent persons are selected under such quota. It is immaterial whether the students belonged to CBSE or State Board or any other pattern of education so long as they are within the age groups prescribed to participate in those sports.
20.The arguments made by some of the impleaded respondents that the students studying under the CBSE pattern belonged to affluent families and they will have edge over State Board students cannot be accepted. First of all, such assertion is not backed by any statistics. On the other hand, one can take notice of the fact that many of eminent sportsmen of this country have hardly finished their school education either due to poverty or due to increased commitment in sports.
21.One of the arguments addressed by the petitioners was that the second respondent has no authority to frame a policy and the State Government had not evolved any policy to discriminate the CBSE students. This contention is well founded because in the impugned order, the second respondent had merely stated that the earlier permission was revoked. He had not referred as to who had granted the earlier permission and the authority who had evolved the present policy. The counter affidavit filed by him does not disclose the level at which the policy was made. Admittedly, the policy which has wider ramification and crystallized by the impugned order, must be taken only by the State Government. May be the second respondent can give his inputs for evolving the same.
22.The other argument that the students from the State Board school are not allowed to participate in the events conducted by the CBSE or SGFI cannot be a ground to reject the claims made by the students affiliated to CBSE. There cannot be a turf war on this issue. Even if such an argument is taken at its face value, the number of children studying under the State Board Schools are far outweigh the total number of students studying in the CBSE Schools, which are largely concentrated in urban areas in Tamil Nadu.
23.Mr.N.L.Rajah, the learned counsel for some petitioners stated that a dispute relating to the admission to professional courses on the basis of marks obtained by the CBSE students and the State Board students came up for consideration by this court during the year 1992. In that batch of cases, the State Government's order in G.O.Ms.No.555, Education Department, dated 15.6.1992 came to be attacked. The matter was dealt with by a Division Bench of this court in Association of Private Schools affiliated to the CBSE Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others reported in 1992 Writ L.R. 477. The Division Bench in order to standardize the claims by rival streams held that the subject marks obtained by both streams may not be a safe standard. The State Government was directed to proceed and admit students into professional course strictly on the basis of the entrance exam marks and not to take into account the subject marks obtained by students from different Board of Education. After making that direction, it has held that it will apply only for the admission for that year. But in paragraph 62, the court directed to evolve a long term solution by recommending the constitution of a committee, which will have a nominee of the Union of India, Government of Tamil Nadu and eminent educationists to make recommendation for a system and procedure for admission to professional course in future.
24.Even in the present case, it is essential for the Tamil Nadu State Government to make such an attempt to have broad based consultation with all the stakeholder. If necessary, they must form a committee to consider the controversies raised in these writ petitions and arrive at a proper solution, which will be crystallized in the form of a policy of the State Government in consonance with the constitutional mandate, considering the future interest of school going children in Tamil Nadu. Till such time such policy is spelt out and adopted, no CBSE students shall be prevented in participating in various sports events conducted under the Tamil Nadu School Education Department.
25.With reference to the writ petition filed by the Association of Physical Education Teachers and Directors (W.P.No.15954 of 2009), the same will have to be rejected on the ground that the said association has no locus-standi to file the present writ petition. In any event, the demand for participation of the State Board students in the CBSE sports/tournaments did not come up from any parents or students or from any State Board schools. As and when the State Government frames a policy after consulting all the stakeholders by forming a committee comprising representatives of Center and State, this issue can also be resolved.
26.This Court, in the light of the above, is not suggesting the composition of committee for making such consultation. It is entirely for the State Government to frame guidelines by forming an appropriate committee. Suffice to state that the committee should also take into account the representations of various stakeholders on this issue.
27.Accordingly, W.P.No.15954 of 2009 will stand dismissed. All other writ petitions, i.e. W.P.NOs.12597,13368,13839 and 13840 OF 2009, 22691 to 22695 of 2008, 14583, 13908 to 13911 and 16769 of 2009 and 20729 of 2008 shall stand disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions shall stand dismissed.
vvk To
1.The Assistant Secretary, M/s.Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), Regional Office, Chennai New No.3 (Old No.1630-A) J-Block, Anna Nagar (W), 16th Main Road, Chennai-600 040.
2.The Chairman, Secretary and Chief Vigilance Officer, M/s.Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), CBSE Headquarters, No.2, Community Centre, Preet Vihar, Delhi-110 092.
3.M/s.Department of School Education, represented by its Director, DPI Buildings, Chennai-6.
4.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
5.The Director of School Education, Tamilnadu, Chennai-600 006.
6.The School Games Federation of India, represented by its President, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi 110 009