Libertatem Magazine

Karnataka High Court asks State to Find Solution in Plea against Ban on Virtual Classes

Contents of this Page

A writ petition was filed under Article 226 and 227 on 22nd June. The Petitioner challenged the ban imposed on the virtual classes.

Petitioner’s Submission

The petitioners are the parents of the students studying in various schools. They challenged the ban imposed on virtual classes from LKG to 5th grade. He submitted, it happened without providing the guidelines on alternate modes of imparting education. He also argued that the ban affects not only the petitioner and his children but also all students of this age group. Thus, the writ petition concerns a matter of large public interest. The writ is to bring to the notice of the Honourable Court about the arbitrary action.

Grounds for Challenge

The petitioner challenged the ban on the ground that the “notice” issued is illegal. The respondent has not mentioned any statute under which the “notice” is released and implemented. He contended that the KEA does not give any power to the respondent to suspend educational activities in the State. Moreover, only specific sections pertain to the safety and security of students and fee apply to CBSE and ICSE Schools. Thus, no power vests on the respondent to stop all educational activities in the entire State.

He contended that the “notice” is discriminatory. It only bans school to continue online classes, whereas other institutes are free to do so. The “notice” violates the Fundamental Right to Education. It does not provide any alternative for continuing the classes and “blanket ban” on online classes. The notice also violates the rights of teachers in Karnataka as enshrined under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. So, the Petitioner’s and staff are deprived of income and livelihood.

Petitioner’s Prayer

The petitioner prayed the Honourable Court to issue the writ of certiorari quashing the “notice”. Moreover, to pass any order that they may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.

Court’s Decision

The Court directed the State to find a suitable alternative to the circumstances. It also asked the State to respond to the petition to challenge the “blanket ban” on online classes. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

About the Author