The school sought an urgent interim relief from the Supreme Court on the ground that the nursery admission process, under the local law, has already begun on January 1.
The Supreme Court today said that it would pass an interim order on January 7 on various pleas challenging the Delhi High Court decision to set aside the 60 per cent quota in the prestigious Sanskriti School here for wards of group-A government officials.
A bench comprising Justices AR Dave and AK Goel also sought assistance of senior advocate Kapil Sibal in deciding the case and appointed him as amicus curiae.
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Centre and senior advocate KK Venugopal, who represented the school administration, said that an interim order, allowing the institution to continue with the admission process under the old scheme, be passed till the matter is finally decided by the Supreme Court.
While setting aside the 60 per cent quota in Sanskriti School, the High Court in its November 6 judgement had said that it was "akin to the erstwhile segregation of white and black students in the US and violated constitutional provisions of equality and right to education".
The Centre and the School have separately challenged the High Court decision. "It is an unaided private school which provides free education to students of EWS (economically weaker section) category also without claiming reimbursements and hence, no writ petition was maintainable against it," Mr Venugopal said.
In response to query as to what will happen to those seats which will remain vacant after granting admissions to the wards of government employees, Mr Rohatgi said, "No seat remains vacant. If one more school is opened today, the seats will be filled up by the wards of government servants alone in no time".
The school sought an urgent interim relief on the ground that the nursery admission process, under the local law, has already begun on January 1, and it be also allowed to initiate the process under the old procedures.
Mr Sibal, on being asked by the bench, agreed to assist the court as an amicus and said that one of the wards of his relative studies in the school and "nobody should raise it at the later stage."
The Attorney General and Mr Venugopal said that they have no objection "whatsoever" on Mr Sibal being appointed as the amicus curiae in the matter.