'Reprehensible': Delhi High Court On DPS Dwarka Allegedly Engaging Bouncers To Block Students' Entry Amid Fee Hike

Calling it a reprehensible practice, the Delhi High Court on Thursday expressed its dismay at the conduct of Delhi Public School (DPS) Dwarka engaging “bouncers” to physically block entry of students over the issue of fee hike.

Justice Sachin Datta made the observation while disposing of an application filed by parents of various students who were expelled by the school for non payment of fees.

This was after the Court was informed that pursuant to a coordinate bench's decision, the school had withdrawn its striking off orders issued to the parents.

The Court said that since the impugned orders whereby the name of 31 children had been struck off the rolls of the school has been withdrawn and the concerned students have been reinstated, the controversy raised in the application had become moot.

However, it clarified that if the school seeks to take any action in future by taking recourse to Rule 35 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, then it will issue a prior communication specifically putting the concerned students or their parents or guardians to notice and give them a reasonable opportunity to show cause against such action.

“This Court is also constrained to express its dismay at the alleged conduct of the petitioner school in engaging “bouncers” to physically block entry of certain students into the school premises. Such a reprehensible practice has no place in an institute of learning. It reflects not only disregard to the dignity of a child but also fundamental misunderstanding of a school's role in the society,” it said.

Justice Datta said that public shaming or intimidation of a student on account of financial default, especially through force or coercive action, not only constitutes mental harassment but also undermines the psychological well being and self-worth of a child.

“The use of “bouncers” fosters a climate of fear, humiliation and exclusion that is incompatible with the fundamental ethos of a school. A school though charges fees for the services rendered, cannot be equated with a pure commercial establishment,” it said.

Further, it said that the school is entitled to charge appropriate fees, especially given the financial outlay required to sustain infrastructure, remunerate staff and provide a conducive learning environment but such school is different from a normal commercial establishment, inasmuch as it carries with it fiduciary and moral responsibilities towards its students.

“It must also be emphasised that the concerned parents are obliged to adhere and comply with the orders passed by this Court as regards payment of requisite fees to the school,” it concluded.

Recently, a coordinate bench had directed that students whose names were struck down from the school rolls, shall be allowed to continue their studies, subject to the parents depositing 50% of the hiked school fee for the academic years 2024-25 onwards.

Earlier, the Court had hinted at staying the school's order, noting that the school, while removing the students from the rolls, prima facie did not comply with the Delhi School Education Act, as per which parents of such students have to be provided a reasonable opportunity to show cause why such an action should not be taken.

A direction was sought by the parents on the DoE and the concerned District Magistrate to ensure safety and security of the children as well as the continuance of their education.

The parents also sought a direction on the authorities to ensure compliance of an interim order passed on April 16 by the Court reprimanding the school for subjecting the students to discriminatory treatment, including not permitting them to visit canteen and interact with their classmates, over alleged arrears of fees.

Justice Datta had, as an interim measure, had restrained the school from indulging in any conduct as mentioned in the DM's inspection report–including "confining the students in the library of the school, preventing students from attending classes, segregating the students who have not paid the fees, preventing the said students from interacting with the other students, preventing the said students from having access to all amenities of the school, subjecting such students to any other form of discrimination /prejudice".

Case title: Delhi Public School Dwarka vs. National Commission For Protection Of Child Rights And Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 665

Click here to read order