Delhi High Court Urges Authorities To Improve Digital Access In Higher Education, Minimise Digital Divide

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked the authorities to take steps to provide better digital access to the students in higher education in various disciples and to also minimise the “digital divide.”

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela was dealing with a PIL filed by one Nora Beniwal, a Class 12th student, seeking better implementation of the National Education Policy, 2020.

It was the petitioner's case that digital divide in access to education is a cause of concern which needs to be addressed.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner referred to empirical data and submitted that the all India survey of higher education notices that there is a digital divide in urban and rural areas.

On this, the CJ remarked that the once the Central Government has taken a policy decision, it is for the said authority to decide how to implement the policy, adding that the Court has its own limitations in such matters.

“The petition appears to be a good essay. Your intention may be very good but there are certain limitations on the Court. We can share your concern that digital divide is causing stress to those who do not have accessibility tools. But for that, the government of India has framed a policy. They are in the process of implementing it.”

“We are not discouraging you. We are saying it is a good essay on digital divide so far as the accessibility in higher institutions…Virtually you are asking us to act as executive. We share your concern. But we have our own limitations. You should approach the executive,” the CJ added.

The Bench noted that the NEP was issued by the Central Government to ensure various reforms in the field of higher education in different disciplines, both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

It noted that one of the concerns addressed in the policy is in relation to making provision for digital libraries and digital infrastructure in the institutions of higher education.

The Bench relied upon a recent Supreme Court judgment in Pragya Prasoon v. Union of India wherein the need for providing access to essential services in the education field was underscored.

It noted that the Apex Court had observed that providing essential services in such fields, including education, can be traced to right to life under Article 21, in light of the present day technological developments and realities.

The Bench said that the prayers sought in the PIL need to be considered by the government and its agencies which are responsible statutorily to regulate the aspect of education and to implement the 2020 policy.

The Court said that the said government agencies include Government of India through department of higher education, UGC, AICTE, NCTE, NMC, PCI, DCI and other statutory bodies.

“Apart from the aforesaid agencies, such responsibility also lies upon the higher education department of GNCTD. Accordingly, we permit the petitioner to represent the authorities by making a detailed and exhaustive representation or application by taking all the pleas available to the petitioner,” the Court said.

It added that whenever such a representation is made, the authorities must decide the same and take appropriate decision.

“We expect that the authorities shall address the concerns raised in the petition and take appropriate steps to provide for better digital access to students in higher education in various disciplines and further shall minimize the digital divide as far as access to means to education such as means of digital libraries are concerned,” the Court said.

Title: Nora Beniwal v. Union of India & Ors