It has been reported in the media that a meeting was held in Mysore recently in which the problem of heavy school bags was discussed. It is reported that the harmful effects of carrying heavy school bags on the health of the children were discussed as well as various possible solutions to the problem. But it appears that the legal aspects of the problem were not discussed at the meeting. The purpose of this article is to fill this gap.
Over several years, Mysore Grahakara Parishat wrote to the state government about the problem but nothing happened. In fact, the bags seemed getting bigger every year. We then consulted the noted High Court advocate X.M.Joseph and he suggested filing a Public Interest Litigation in the High Court. One of the Directive Principles of the Constitution (Article 39f) mandates that "children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner". It is well documented that carrying heavy school bags affects the physical (and also mental) health of school children and forcing children to carry heavy bags is a violation of this Directive Principle. According to Article 37 of the Constitution, Directive Principles "are not enforceable by any court of law". Even though Directive Principles are not strictly enforceable, the Supreme Court in the last few decades has continuously expanded the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution (Right to Life) so that many violations of Directive Principles were also interpreted as violations of the Right to Life. Thus several Directive Principles have been given essentially the status of Fundamental Rights by the Supreme Court. It is significant that in one decision ((1984) 2 SCC 244), the Supreme Court has ordered the government to follow the Directive Principle 39f mentioned above. Encouraged by such activist interpretations by the Supreme Court, especially with reference to Article 39f, MGP filed a PIL on the school bag issue against the State Government in the Karnataka High Court in 2001 (No. 1969/2001). It collected the results of various scientific studies on the (present and future) harmful effects of carrying heavy loads on the mental and physical health of children and placed them before the court. Advertisements were placed in state level newspapers in Kannada and English asking private schools to become, if interested, parties to the suit. MGP's PIL was decided on 8-2-2002. Unfortunately, the High Court declined to take an activist position on the issue and refused to interfere. The following is the full text of the judgment given by Chief Justice N.K. Jain and Justice N.Kumar.
"1. This P.I.L. is filed to direct the respondent to regulate, prevent and ensure that the school going children in Karnataka do not carry heavy loaded baggage to school so as to prevent physical and mental health hazards among school going children in Karnataka.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material placed on record.
3. It is within the dominion of the Government and the school authorities to prescribe a syllabus for a particular class and this Court cannot issue any direction to reduce the books which are necessary as per the timetable and according to the syllabus prescribed. It is upto the government and the Education Department to consider this aspect and for that the petitioner is always free to make a representation and suggestion to the Government regarding the required books and the syllabus. If any representation is made, Government is always free to consider the same and dispose of in accordance with law. No direction can be issued in this PIL.
This PIL-petition is dismissed."
Even though MGP knew that the prospects were not bright, it followed the suggestion of the High Court, held a meeting with school teachers in Mysore, collected their recommendations to ameliorate the heavy school bag problem and forwarded them to the state government. As expected, it did not receive any reply.
Anyone who is seriously concerned about the issue might try to file another PIL on the above lines. It is possible that the present Court may be willing to take a more activist position.
H A B PARPIA, Mysore Grahakara Parishat
Over several years, Mysore Grahakara Parishat wrote to the state government about the problem but nothing happened. In fact, the bags seemed getting bigger every year. We then consulted the noted High Court advocate X.M.Joseph and he suggested filing a Public Interest Litigation in the High Court. One of the Directive Principles of the Constitution (Article 39f) mandates that "children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner". It is well documented that carrying heavy school bags affects the physical (and also mental) health of school children and forcing children to carry heavy bags is a violation of this Directive Principle. According to Article 37 of the Constitution, Directive Principles "are not enforceable by any court of law". Even though Directive Principles are not strictly enforceable, the Supreme Court in the last few decades has continuously expanded the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution (Right to Life) so that many violations of Directive Principles were also interpreted as violations of the Right to Life. Thus several Directive Principles have been given essentially the status of Fundamental Rights by the Supreme Court. It is significant that in one decision ((1984) 2 SCC 244), the Supreme Court has ordered the government to follow the Directive Principle 39f mentioned above. Encouraged by such activist interpretations by the Supreme Court, especially with reference to Article 39f, MGP filed a PIL on the school bag issue against the State Government in the Karnataka High Court in 2001 (No. 1969/2001). It collected the results of various scientific studies on the (present and future) harmful effects of carrying heavy loads on the mental and physical health of children and placed them before the court. Advertisements were placed in state level newspapers in Kannada and English asking private schools to become, if interested, parties to the suit. MGP's PIL was decided on 8-2-2002. Unfortunately, the High Court declined to take an activist position on the issue and refused to interfere. The following is the full text of the judgment given by Chief Justice N.K. Jain and Justice N.Kumar.
"1. This P.I.L. is filed to direct the respondent to regulate, prevent and ensure that the school going children in Karnataka do not carry heavy loaded baggage to school so as to prevent physical and mental health hazards among school going children in Karnataka.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material placed on record.
3. It is within the dominion of the Government and the school authorities to prescribe a syllabus for a particular class and this Court cannot issue any direction to reduce the books which are necessary as per the timetable and according to the syllabus prescribed. It is upto the government and the Education Department to consider this aspect and for that the petitioner is always free to make a representation and suggestion to the Government regarding the required books and the syllabus. If any representation is made, Government is always free to consider the same and dispose of in accordance with law. No direction can be issued in this PIL.
This PIL-petition is dismissed."
Even though MGP knew that the prospects were not bright, it followed the suggestion of the High Court, held a meeting with school teachers in Mysore, collected their recommendations to ameliorate the heavy school bag problem and forwarded them to the state government. As expected, it did not receive any reply.
Anyone who is seriously concerned about the issue might try to file another PIL on the above lines. It is possible that the present Court may be willing to take a more activist position.
H A B PARPIA, Mysore Grahakara Parishat