The High Court of Karnataka on Monday said the State government needs to find a solution immediately to the issues that have cropped up because of the “blanket” ban on online classes from preschool to Class 5. It pointed out that a blanket ban could lead to a “chaotic situation”.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Nataraj Rangaswamy made these observations during the hearing of a PIL petition filed by Anumitha Sharma and 22 others, all parents of children studying in various schools. The petitioners had questioned the legality of imposing a blanket ban on online classes.
The Bench, pointing out that the issue involved Article 21A of the Constitution on the right of children to compulsory education, said that continuing education at least for a couple of hours a day should be considered, besides addressing the issue of how students in rural areas, where the online mode may not be possible, can be taught. The Bench also said that it would take up other petitions, filed by two educational institutions, for hearing on Friday, along with this PIL petition.
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Pradeep Nayak contended that the June 15 ban order was not only arbitrary, but also “perverse” as it only banned schools from conducting online classed and did not stop other entities or institutions from involving students in online classes.
Pointing out that the order had brought the process of education to a complete standstill, in a clear violation of the fundamental right to education, the petitioners contended that the constitution of a committee to frame guidelines for the use of media and technology in education after imposing the “blanket ban” showed that the order had been issued without any application of mind and was devoid of logic or reasoning.
It was also pointed out that the government, in its April 17 circular, had specifically allowed schools to impart education through online mode, and this had resulted in schools, teachers and parents investing their time, resources, and energy into seamlessly adapting to the new medium of education. The petitioners stated that the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs specifically allowed the online mode of education.
Meanwhile, the government counsel argued that the ban would be in force only till the government framed guidelines. However, the advocate for the petitioners contended that the government order imposed a blanket ban on online classes till class 5 and the guidelines through the committee were proposed for online classes for students of class 6 onwards.
