PHC puts Centre on notice in Cantt Board schools case

PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Wednesday put on notice the federal government to submit reply whether or not the schools run by Cantonment Boards were under its jurisdiction and the government’s education policy was applicable to them.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Yahya Afridi and Justice Muhammad Ayub also sought reply from the federal government on free education to the children from age 5 to 16. The bench was hearing writ petition of Sherzada, a gardener in security forces, seeking an implementation of the high court decision regarding decrease in promotion fee and annual charges in the Cantonment Boards schools.

Salman Fayaz Mir, counsel for the petitioner, submitted before the bench that a school run by the Cantonment Board, Peshawar had notified 300 percent increase in fees through a notification in 2017. He said that the petitioner’s four children were studying in the school and their school fee, after the notification, had increased to Rs6000, which is unbearable for him.

However, he pointed out that as per the high court’s decision, a school cannot increase promotion and tuition fees of more than three percent. Besides, he submitted that under Article 225 of Constitution, the state is responsible to ensure free education.

However, legal advisor of the Cantonment Board Peshawar appeared in the case and submitted that the Cantonment Board does not come into the definition of the state and thus the decision is not applicable to the schools run by the cantonment boards.

In reply, the petitioner’s lawyer submitted that an institution or board, which collects taxes, come into the definition of the state.

The legal advisor argued that these are not government schools and the management of these schools has the authority to increase the fees. He further added that there are another 16 federal government schools in the Cantonment and they are also getting fees from the students.

However, Deputy Attorney General Musarratullah Khan sought some time for submitting reply on behalf of the federal government in the case. The bench made the federal government as party and directed it to submit reply in the case before next hearing.