<p>The Supreme Court on Friday refused to act on a plea by an English medium schools association against a Karnataka government order permitting registration of only those institutions which imparted education in Kannada for classes I to V. <br /><br /></p>.<p>A bench of Justices Vikramjit Sen and C Nagappan told senior advocate Mohan G R, representing Bengaluru-based Associated Managements of Government Recognised English Medium Schools, that no contempt action would arise in the matter. <br /><br />The association contended that the notification issued on November 11 was contrary to the apex court's Constitution bench May 6 decision.<br /><br />It sought contempt action against State government officials for issuing the direction where only Kannada medium schools would get recognition. <br /><br />It also sought a stay on the Karnataka High Court order of January 9 refusing its plea to start contempt action against State government officials for issuing such a notification.<br />The counsel contended that the association’s right to open new schools was affected by the government’s move as they were directed to impart education in Kannnada medium only for standard I to V in new schools.<br /><br />The court, however, said that the association could withdraw its special leave petition and seek any other remedy like a writ petition.<br /><br />“You can file a writ petition and rely upon the Supreme Court's Constitution bench decision to challenge the government’s notification,” the bench said, allowing the association to withdraw its petition.<br /><br />The apex court had on September 9 also dismissed a review petition against its May verdict wherein it was held that the state government does not have a right to impose the “mother tongue” of a child as the medium of instruction in primary education.<br /><br />A five-judge Constitution bench presided over by the then Chief Justice R M Lodha ruled that the imposition of mother tongue affected the fundamental rights under Articles 19 (freedom of speech and expression), 29 (protection of interest of minorities) and 30 (right of minorities to establish institution) of the Constitution.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Friday refused to act on a plea by an English medium schools association against a Karnataka government order permitting registration of only those institutions which imparted education in Kannada for classes I to V. <br /><br /></p>.<p>A bench of Justices Vikramjit Sen and C Nagappan told senior advocate Mohan G R, representing Bengaluru-based Associated Managements of Government Recognised English Medium Schools, that no contempt action would arise in the matter. <br /><br />The association contended that the notification issued on November 11 was contrary to the apex court's Constitution bench May 6 decision.<br /><br />It sought contempt action against State government officials for issuing the direction where only Kannada medium schools would get recognition. <br /><br />It also sought a stay on the Karnataka High Court order of January 9 refusing its plea to start contempt action against State government officials for issuing such a notification.<br />The counsel contended that the association’s right to open new schools was affected by the government’s move as they were directed to impart education in Kannnada medium only for standard I to V in new schools.<br /><br />The court, however, said that the association could withdraw its special leave petition and seek any other remedy like a writ petition.<br /><br />“You can file a writ petition and rely upon the Supreme Court's Constitution bench decision to challenge the government’s notification,” the bench said, allowing the association to withdraw its petition.<br /><br />The apex court had on September 9 also dismissed a review petition against its May verdict wherein it was held that the state government does not have a right to impose the “mother tongue” of a child as the medium of instruction in primary education.<br /><br />A five-judge Constitution bench presided over by the then Chief Justice R M Lodha ruled that the imposition of mother tongue affected the fundamental rights under Articles 19 (freedom of speech and expression), 29 (protection of interest of minorities) and 30 (right of minorities to establish institution) of the Constitution.</p>
