views
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Friday stayed an amendment introduced by the State government to Section 3 of the TN Uniform School Syllabus Act, 2010, which postponed the implementation of the Uniform School Education System (USE).“We are of the firm view that if the impugned Amending Act is to be given effect to, it would result in unsettling various issues and the interest of the children would be jeopardised. While considering the balance of convenience, we have to bear in mind that the paramount consideration shall be the welfare of the children,’’ the First Bench comprising CJ M Y Eqbal and Justice T S Sivagnanam observed.The Bench, however, said that the government was entitled to delete, add, modify, substitute or alter any chapters, paragraphs, portion of the textbooks, which included to propagate the achievement of a political party or an individual and issue appropriate instructions in this regard. “At this stage, we are constrained to observe that the government should avoid to include any chapter in any of the books with an intent to propagate a particular political party or individual,’’ the bench added. It also said that the order of stay would not operate as a bar for the government to conduct a detailed study of the common syllabus and textbooks introduced under the Act. The bench was disposing of a batch of writ miscellaneous pleas filed for and against the Act. Directing the government to file its counter-affidavits in the main writ petitions seeking to declare of the amendment as ultra vires, the bench adjourned the matter.Justifying its decision to order a stay, the court said no materials had been produced before the court to show that any review was done by any expert panel before passing the amending Act on June 7. The speed at which it was made prima facie showed that the action of the government to switch back to the old syllabus was not based on the report of any expert panel, the interim order running to 32 pages said. The bench observed that at this stage, it was faced with two vital issues. First, the validity of the amending Act had to be tested to find out whether it infringed any of the constitutional guarantees and whether it nullified the earlier judgment of a division bench of this court. This could be done only after the State filed its counter-affidavit to the main writ pleas challenging the vires of the amending Act.The more important issue was to see as to what had to be done in the interregnum. “At this juncture, we may not ignore stages or circumstances under which the amending Act was passed. The first Cabinet meeting was held on May 22 and the notification for printing the books with old syllabus was issued on May 23. Though in the statement of Objects and Reasons of the amending Act it has been stated that a detailed review of the syllabus sought to be introduced under the Parent Act was undertaken, no material has been placed before this court as to the manner in which such review was undertaken. It would be rather impossible for any such expert panel to conduct a review of the syllabus and books for classes I to 10 within a day after the cabinet first met. ,’’ the bench said and added that it was clear that the action appeared to have been taken in a haste.“We are prima facie satisfied that the amending Act in effect repeals or indefinitely puts on hold the implementation of the Parent Act,’’ the bench said and granted the stay.
Comments
0 comment