School Can't Deny Transfer Certificate To Child On Grounds Of Parents Having Matrimonial Dispute: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that a school cannot deny transfer certificate to a child merely because the parents have ongoing matrimonial or guardianship dispute. “…the school cannot deny the issuance of Transfer Certificate (TC) to the child who has sought admission in other school. In the event of delay in issuance of Transfer Certificate, even a disciplinary action can be...
The Delhi High Court has observed that a school cannot deny transfer certificate to a child merely because the parents have ongoing matrimonial or guardianship dispute.
“…the school cannot deny the issuance of Transfer Certificate (TC) to the child who has sought admission in other school. In the event of delay in issuance of Transfer Certificate, even a disciplinary action can be taken against the Head-Master or In-Charge of the school. Needless to say that in a matrimonial or guardianship dispute, it is the interest of the child which is of paramount consideration,” Justice Vikas Mahajan said.
The Court was dealing with a plea filed by a minor through her mother seeking a direction on Delhi Government's Directorate of Education and Montfort School to issue her a transfer certificate.
The child was residing with her mother in Gurugram after they got separated from her father in April last year. After separation, they started living in Gurugram and the child was admitted to another school.
It was the minor's case that Montfort School declined the issuance of Transfer Certificate to her for the reason that the father had written to the school for non-issuance of the certificate.
It was submitted that though the guardianship dispute between the parents was pending before the Family Court, no direction was passed directing non-issuance of Transfer Certificate by Montfort School.
Disposing of the plea, the Court directed the Montfort School to issue the Transfer Certificate to the minor child within a period of one week.
“However, in case the respondent no.2/School feels aggrieved with the present order, it shall be at liberty to file an application to seek revival of the present petition,” the Court said.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Puneet Singh Bindra, Mr. Vivek Kadyan, Mr. Nitin Saroha, Ms. Charu Modi, Ms. Sukriti Seth, Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Ms. Kriti Dang and Ms. Shanya Shukla, Advs
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Ms. Chandrika Sachdev and Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advs. for R-1/DOE; Mr. R.D. Singh and Mr. Prateek Jindal, Advs. for R-3
Title: SAISHA CHHILLAR MINOR REPRESENTED THROUGH HER MOTHER MS. JYOTI CHHILLAR v. THE DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION & ORS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 518