Delhi High Court criticised DPS Dwarka for deploying bouncers to block students over fee dues, calling it mental harassment. The Court said schools must uphold children’s dignity, not act like commercial entities.
New Delhi: Today, on June 05, the Delhi High Court on Thursday expressed deep concern over the public shaming and intimidation of students due to non-payment of academic fees, saying it amounts to mental harassment and harms a child’s psychological health and self-esteem.
This came during the hearing of a case involving Delhi Public School (DPS) Dwarka and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), along with other parties.
ALSO READ: Parents Move Delhi High Court After DPS Dwarka Expels 32 Students Amid Fee Dispute
Justice Sachin Datta criticized DPS Dwarka for allegedly hiring “bouncers” to physically prevent some students from entering the school premises because of unpaid fees.
The Court stated,
“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. Public shaming/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.”
The Court further emphasized the essential role of schools, saying,
“A school though charges fees for the services rendered, cannot be equated with a pure commercial establishment. The driving force and character of a school (particularly a school such as the petitioner, which is run by a pre-eminent society) is rooted not in profit maximisation but in public welfare, nation building and the holistic development of children. The primary objective of a school is to impart education and inculcate values, not to operate as a business enterprise.”
This case arose after the parents of 32 students (later clarified as 31) approached the High Court, stating that their children were expelled from DPS Dwarka for not paying the fees.
The parents alleged that the school deliberately did not encash cheques submitted to pay the fee hike approved by government authorities.
They also complained that
“bouncers were placed outside the school to stop these students from entering the premises.”
Earlier, a co-ordinate bench of the Delhi High Court on May 16 had ordered the students’ reinstatement, subject to the parents depositing 50% of the increased fees.
Following this ruling, DPS issued a notification on June 4 withdrawing the expulsion order and reinstated the students on the condition that the hiked fees, as directed by the court, were paid.
Justice Datta was informed about this development during the hearing and consequently disposed of the application, saying,
“Since the impugned order/s 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 present application has become moot.”
While closing the case, the Court reminded that schools have both fiduciary and moral duties toward their students.
It said,
“The school, no doubt, is entitled to charge appropriate fees, especially given the financial outlay required to sustain infrastructure, remunerate staff and provide a conducive learning environment. However, the school is different from a normal commercial establishment, inasmuch as it carries with it fiduciary and moral responsibilities towards its students.”
The Court also stressed that parents must comply with the High Court’s orders on fee payment and expressed hope for cooperation from both parties.
It stated,
“The school as well as the parents will act with circumspection and cooperate with each other with a view to advance the interest of the concerned students.”
The application was filed by parents in a pending plea by DPS challenging the NCPCR’s order directing the Delhi Police to register an FIR against the school.
ALSO READ: “Do You Get Sadistic Pleasure?” — Delhi HC Slams DPS Dwarka Over Expulsion of 32 Students
The FIR was to be registered based on allegations that DPS confined some students to the library, publicly named them, and expelled others due to unpaid fees.
One incident reportedly involved a girl being denied help during menstruation because her fees were overdue. The High Court stayed the FIR registration.
Earlier, on April 16, the Court had severely reprimanded DPS Dwarka for segregating and harassing students for non-payment of fees, ordering that no student should be stopped from attending classes.
Senior Advocates Pinaki Misra and Puneet Mittal, along with Advocates Bhuvan Gugnani, Sakshi Mendiratta, and Nupur Mantoo, represented DPS Dwarka. Advocates Manoj K. Sharma, Manish Gupta, Vivek Chandrasekhar, Akanchha Jhunjhunwala, Deepti Verma, and Sandeep Gupta appeared for the parents.
Advocates Abhaid Parikh, Rishabh Dubey, and Garima Sardana represented NCPCR. Standing Counsel Sameer Vashishtha and advocate Avni Singh appeared for the Department of Education, while Senior Panel Counsel Satya Ranjan Swain and Panel Counsel Kautilya Birat represented Delhi Police.
Background of the Case
This legal battle began when Delhi Public School (DPS) Dwarka allegedly expelled 31 students due to non-payment of increased school fees, which had been approved by government authorities.
The parents challenged this expulsion, stating that the school had resorted to harsh and humiliating tactics, including deploying security personnel (“bouncers”) to prevent children from entering the school, publicly naming students with unpaid fees, and in one reported case, refusing help to a menstruating girl because of her fee default.
The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) intervened, directing the Delhi Police to file an FIR against the school for its treatment of students.
The Delhi High Court initially stayed the FIR but expressed strong disapproval of the school’s conduct, emphasizing the school’s duty to protect students’ dignity and well-being.
The Court highlighted that schools must not act like commercial businesses focused on profit but should prioritize education, public welfare, and holistic development.
The High Court ordered that the students be allowed back into classes after parents deposited 50% of the revised fees. The school withdrew its expulsion order and reinstated the students accordingly.
This case has underscored the sensitive balance between the rights and responsibilities of schools and parents, especially in relation to fee payments and the fundamental rights of students to dignity and education without harassment or discrimination.
The Court’s observations stress that schools must uphold moral and fiduciary responsibilities, and parents must cooperate to ensure children’s uninterrupted education.
Current Status of Out-of-School Children in India (2024–2025)
India continues to face a serious challenge in ensuring universal access to education. As per recent government data from 2024–2025, approximately 1.17 million children across the country have been identified as out-of-school. These children are not enrolled in primary, secondary, or senior secondary education.
States like Uttar Pradesh reported the highest number of out-of-school children, with over 7.8 lakh students, followed by Jharkhand and Assam, each with more than 60,000 children outside the education system. These figures reflect persistent issues related to access, affordability, and social inclusion in the education sector.
Wider educational databases also suggest that nearly 16.8% of India’s school-age population, between 6 to 17 years, remain out of school. This translates to over 47 million children, highlighting an urgent need for targeted interventions.
Several key reasons contribute to this situation:
- Financial barriers in economically weaker households.
- Social and gender-based discrimination, particularly impacting girls.
- Geographic inaccessibility, with many children living in remote or underserved areas.
- Quality-related issues such as inadequate infrastructure, lack of trained teachers, and outdated teaching methods.
These factors, either independently or collectively, lead to high dropout rates and prevent children from staying in school or accessing basic education.
Government Initiatives to Address Educational Gaps
To address the issue of children missing out on education, the Indian government has launched various schemes and policies:
- Right to Education (RTE) Act
This law guarantees free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14 years and mandates 25% reservation for children from weaker sections in private schools. - Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan
A flagship program designed to improve school infrastructure, teacher training, inclusive education, and overall student learning outcomes from preschool to senior secondary levels. - Mid-Day Meal Scheme (PM-POSHAN)
Provides nutritious meals to children in government and aided schools to incentivize regular attendance and reduce malnutrition-related dropouts. - Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalaya (KGBV)
Aims to set up residential schools for girls from marginalized communities, especially in educationally backward blocks. - NIPUN Bharat Mission
Focuses on ensuring foundational literacy and numeracy by the end of Grade 3 for all children, strengthening early-grade education. - PM SHRI Scheme
Enhances selected government schools with upgraded facilities, smart classrooms, and improved teaching-learning processes to make them model schools. - State-Level Initiatives
- In Andhra Pradesh, an enrollment drive has been launched to increase student admissions in government schools for the academic year 2025–26.
- Assam introduced higher secondary classes in tea garden schools to improve education among tea tribe communities.
- Chhattisgarh has rationalized over 10,000 schools to optimize teacher allocation and bring down dropout rates.
- In Andhra Pradesh, an enrollment drive has been launched to increase student admissions in government schools for the academic year 2025–26.
Legal and Ethical Boundaries of School Fee Collection in India
Fee Collection Is Legal, But Not Unchecked
In India, private schools are allowed to charge fees to maintain infrastructure, pay teachers, and provide quality education. However, they are not meant to function as profit-driven commercial enterprises. The law recognises education as a basic right, not a luxury. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 ensures free schooling for children aged 6 to 14 in government and aided institutions. It also mandates a 25% seat reservation in private schools for students from economically weaker sections, making it clear that financial status should never block a child’s access to learning.
State-Level Regulation of Private School Fees
To protect parents from unfair fee hikes, several states including Delhi, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu have implemented Fee Regulation Acts. These laws establish committees that supervise private school fee structures, ensuring that increases are reasonable and justified. Schools must often seek approval for revised fees and maintain transparency in fee communication. These frameworks ensure that education remains accessible and not overly commercialised.
Guidelines from Educational Boards
Central boards such as CBSE and ICSE have also laid down ethical guidelines related to fee collection. Schools affiliated with these boards are instructed to avoid coercive practices. This means no denial of classroom access, no withholding of report cards, and certainly no public embarrassment of students due to unpaid dues. The aim is to protect children from emotional harm while encouraging parents to fulfil their responsibilities in a dignified manner.
Ethical Responsibility of Schools
Schools are more than service providers—they are safe spaces for learning and development. They hold a moral and emotional responsibility to support their students, especially those facing financial difficulties. Actions like blocking school entry, segregating children, or using intimidation to collect fees go against the very values schools are supposed to uphold. These practices can cause long-term emotional distress and harm a child’s confidence and mental health.
A Balanced Approach Is Essential
While schools do need funds to function effectively, fee recovery must be handled with compassion and fairness. Financial sustainability must go hand-in-hand with a commitment to child welfare, inclusivity, and dignity. When schools and parents work together with mutual respect, it helps create a healthier, more equitable education system for all.
Case Title:
Delhi Public School Dwarka vs National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and Ors
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Our Reports on DPS Dwarka
