<div dir="ltr"><h1 id="page-title" class="">State board schools cry foul over DPI notification</h1>
DC CORRESPONDENT | <span>December 31, 2014, 06.12 am IST</span>
<div class=""><div class=""><div class="" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso"><img src="http://dd508hmafkqws.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/styles/article_node_view/public/students_7_1_1_0.jpg" alt="Associated Managements of English Medium School in Karnataka (KAMS) has alleged that this whole exercise was aimed at exploiting the school managements by the officials." title="Associated Managements of English Medium School in Karnataka (KAMS) has alleged that this whole exercise was aimed at exploiting the school managements by the officials.">
<div class="">
Associated Managements of English Medium School in Karnataka (KAMS)
has alleged that this whole exercise was aimed at exploiting the school
managements by the officials. </div>
</div></div></div> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>Bengaluru:</strong>
A week after Department of Public Instruction (DPI) published the list
of 1,266 private unaided schools in the city stating that these schools
are operating without department recognition and permission, a new
controversy has been erupted.</p><p style="text-align:justify">Associated
Managements of English Medium School in Karnataka (KAMS) has alleged
that this whole exercise was aimed at exploiting the school managements
by the officials.</p><p style="text-align:justify">Speaking to
reporters here on Tuesday, Mr. D. Shashikumar, general secretary of the
KAMS released documents showing that many schools which were recognised a
decade ago are also listed as unauthorised in the new list.</p><p style="text-align:justify">He
warned that if DPI does not withdraw the notices issued to the schools,
they will consider of not admitting students under the Right to
Education (RTE) free quota seats in the next academic year.</p><p style="text-align:justify">Mr.
Shashikumar informed that while releasing the list DPI overlooked
critical issues. Majority of the state schools in the city have been
listed as unauthorised citing violation of the language policy.</p><p style="text-align:justify">But
in reality, Supreme Court has already struck down the language policy.
Adding to it many schools were shown that they are operating pre-primary
schools illegally without considering the fact that these schools were
permitted to start pre-primary schools in the year 2006 itself.</p><p style="text-align:justify">“Now,
in the name of the notice, few officials of the department are
demanding money in the name of regularisation. We will move the court
seeking relief,” he said.</p><p style="text-align:justify">“Till last
year, RTE students were admitted to these schools after verifying the
documents. But within six months now DPI officials are saying that these
schools have no valid permission. How it is possible?” he questioned.</p><p style="text-align:justify">No
reimbursement: Mr. Shashikumar informed that even seven months after
the start of the academic year 2014-15, DPI yet to reimburse the school
fee of RTE quota students.</p><p style="text-align:justify">“Every
year DPI officials assure that they will reimburse the fee money with in
few weeks. But they never stick to their assurance. This is resulted in
20% to 30% loss to the schools," he said.<br><br>“We are demanding
realistic fee from the DPI. But they are not ready to listen to us. We
will take a final decision on RTE admission process for the academic
year 2015-16 in next few days," he added.</p>But
when contacted DPI officials, they refuted the allegations. A senior
officer informed that for the first time, a list of unauthorised schools
is prepared based on the available documents and school visit. "Schools
are given enough time to submit documents and get clean chit," he
said.<br><br><a href="http://www.deccanchronicle.com/141231/nation-current-affairs/article/state-board-schools-cry-foul-over-dpi-notification">http://www.deccanchronicle.com/141231/nation-current-affairs/article/state-board-schools-cry-foul-over-dpi-notification</a><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">**************************************<br>N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members<br>and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message. A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)<br><br>For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to <a href="https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/">https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/</a><br>listinfo/lgpolicy-list<br>*******************************************</div>
</div>