Delhi HC disposes of PIL seeking special syllabus for autistic children, directs petitioner to approach govt bodies with detailed suggestions.
New Delhi: Today, on July 2, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday (July 2) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by petitioner Anish Sharma, who had asked the court to direct the government to create a special school syllabus for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).
The court said that this issue is related to government policy and should be taken up by the concerned educational and policy-making authorities instead of the judiciary.
The bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela made it clear that the subject required expert study and proper scientific research.
ALSO READ: [Breaking] Major Technical Disruption in Supreme Court Advocate on Record (AOR) Exam
The Court suggested that the petitioner should not bring this matter directly to court but instead approach the right authorities who can make decisions on education and policy.
The court advised the petitioner, saying that he should submit a detailed and well-researched representation to the Union Government, the Delhi Government, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), and other relevant educational authorities.
This would allow the experts in those departments to look into the matter and consider appropriate changes, if necessary.
While hearing the case, the Court acknowledged that the PIL was filed with good intentions. However, the bench pointed out that the PIL lacked strong data, detailed planning, or proper direction to support its demands.
Justice Gedela said,
“Go to policy makers, not implementers.”
This means that the petitioner should go to those who create and change policies rather than those who only carry them out.
The court also allowed Anish Sharma to make a formal representation in the future. If he submits a detailed application or proposal backed with valid studies or scientific data, the government bodies are expected to consider it as per the law.
The bench said that each child with autism is different and may require a customised or specific teaching method.
Therefore, it is not possible to create a common syllabus without conducting deep research and understanding each child’s unique needs.
The Court added that such educational changes must be guided by research, expert opinion, and careful policy-making.
ALSO READ: Just Because There Is No Bar, Doesn’t Mean There Is No Limit || SC on AoRs Appearances
They cannot be ordered by the courts without complete knowledge or input from professionals in the field of special education.
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a lifelong neurodevelopmental condition that affects communication, social behaviour, and learning abilities.
It is called a “spectrum” because the level of impact differs from person to person—some children may need only a little help, while others may need lifelong support.
The petitioner’s concern was that there is currently no proper or uniform syllabus designed specifically for autistic children across the country.
He wanted the court to issue guidelines or instructions to create such a syllabus so that children with autism can learn in a better and more inclusive way.
However, the High Court was firm in its stand that this kind of matter cannot be handled by the judiciary and should be left to the expertise of educational departments and government bodies.
Once again, the court reminded the petitioner that the right course of action is to prepare a scientific and evidence-based representation and send it to the appropriate government authorities for review.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court of India Calls for Accountability of Advocates on Record (AoRs)
The PIL was officially closed, but with the liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the authorities again in the future.
The judgment ensured that while the courts may not be the right forum for creating educational policies, it did not close the door on future actions by concerned citizens willing to follow the right procedure.
Case Title:
Anish Sharma v. DOE GNCTD & Anr
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Syllabus
