Using Term ‘Tribal’ Along With Name Of Govt School Is Unwarranted, It Would Result In Stigmatising Children: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court while hearing a suo motu writ petition relating to Kalvarayan Hills, said that the usage of ‘Tribal’ term along with the name of the Government School is unwarranted as it would result in stigmatising the children.
The Court had taken suo motu cognizance of the case after multiple media reports and documentaries highlighted the lack of basic infrastructural facilities in the Kalvarayan Hills region.
A Division Bench comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice C. Kumarappan observed, “It is brought to the notice of this Court that Government Schools are functioning in that locality in the name of “Government Tribal Residential School”. The usage of the term “Tribal” along with the name of the Government School is unwarranted. Such usage of word “Tribal” in School's name, undoubtedly would result in stigmatising the children studying in Schools.”
The Bench added that the children will get the feeling that they are studying in a “Tribal School” and not in a School on par with the other children in nearby localities and stigmatisation of children at no circumstances be approved by the Courts and by the Government.
Advocate General P.S. Raman appeared for the State and Advocate K.R. Tamilmani was the Amicus Curiae.
The Advocate General submitted before the Court that actions are initiated to conduct thorough inspection in Kalvarayan Hills. Earlier, the Court had expressed shock upon learning that the Kalvarayan Hills region was annexed to Indian territory only in 1976 and that voting rights were granted to its residents starting in 1996. Consequently, the development in that area lagged behind other parts of the state, necessitating more focused attention and intervention.
The High Court in the above regard noted, “The status report filed by the 3rd respondent Principal Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, in our opinion is insufficient and is not the ground reality as projected by the learned Amicus Curiae. The money spent on the locality of Kalvarayan Hills and the details furnished in the status report itself raises a doubt, whether the money spent has been utilised properly for the benefit and upliftment of the people in that locality. We are not completely satisfied with the status report filed by the Principal Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department.”
The Court emphasised that wherever such names are used indicating a particular community/caste, the same are to be removed and the schools must be named as “Government School” and children residing in that locality must be granted admission in the school to pursue their education.
“This Court would ask a question. If the Government School is named as “Tribal School”, then what would be the impact in the society. It is painful that even in the 21st century the Government is allowing to use such words in the Government Schools, functioning from and out of public money”, it remarked.
The Court further said that the State of Tamil Nadu, being a fore runner State in social justice, cannot allow such stigmatic words be added as “prefixes” or “suffixes” in the name of the Government Schools or any Government institutions and in this regard, the Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu has to initiate appropriate action.
“The learned Amicus Curiae, Mr.K.R.Tamilmani would submit that the senior officials, before conducting inspection, may look into the report submitted by him along with visuals in the pen drive, so as to understand the ground reality as observed by the learned Amicus Curiae. … the Registry is directed to place the papers before the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice for passing appropriate orders to list the matter before this Bench”, it ordered.
Accordingly, the High Court listed the case on August 2, 2024.
During the previous hearing, the Court had expressed shock upon learning that the Kalvarayan Hills region was annexed to Indian territory only in 1976 and that voting rights were granted to its residents starting in 1996.
Cause Title- Suo Motu Writ Petition v. The Chief Secretary
