- The Supreme Court rejected a PIL seeking biometric attendance for school students nationwide
- The petition aimed to address dummy schools with enrolled but non-attending students
- The bench advised the petitioner to approach the concerned High Court instead of Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking mandatory biometric attendance for school students across the country. As reported by PTI, the petition sought measures to curb the practice of "dummy" schools, where students are enrolled but may not attend regular classes.
A bench of Justices P Narasimha and Alok Aradhe asked the petitioner to approach the concerned High Court instead. The court said it was not inclined to hear the plea filed directly under Article 32 of the Constitution.
"We are giving you liberty to approach the high court," the bench said while dismissing the petition.
The PIL was filed by advocate N K Goswami, who sought directions to the Centre and state governments to introduce a biometric-based attendance system for school students.
The petition also called for a statutory limit on the number of hours school students can spend at coaching centres. It raised concerns about students spending significant time in coaching classes while remaining enrolled in schools.
Rules Sought For Coaching Centres
The petitioner also asked for a mandatory Code of Conduct for coaching centres. The proposed rules would prevent institutes from manipulating their success data and using photographs of toppers in advertisements in a way that could mislead students and parents.
The plea further sought greater transparency in how coaching institutes present their results and student achievements in promotional campaigns.
What Article 32 Means
The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. The provision allows citizens to approach the Supreme Court directly for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
While the Supreme Court has declined to hear the PIL, the petitioner can still raise the issues before a High Court. The bench specifically gave him the liberty to pursue the matter there.
The petition brings attention to concerns surrounding dummy schooling, student attendance and the growing dependence on coaching centres for competitive examination preparation.