Privatization of schools: LHC seeks detailed reply from Punjab govt before June 20
Stay tuned with 24 News HD Android App
Lahore High Court has sought a detailed reply from the Punjab government before June 20 while hearing a plea of the teachers’ alliance against the privatization of public schools, reported 24NewsHD TV channel.
LHC Justice Raheel Kamran Sheikh refused to issue a stay order on the Punjab government’s decision at the request of All Teachers Alliance and Punjab Teachers Union president M Ramzan.
Assistant Advocate General Usman Khan appeared on behalf of the Punjab Government while Ch Umar Hayat advocate and other lawyers appeared on behalf of the petitioners and told the court that the government was handing over the schools with a small number of students to private individuals.
With this act, children will be deprived of free education. The counsel of the teachers union requested the court to issue a stay order on the government's decision.
Assistant Advocate General Usman Khan while rejecting the teachers union plea told the court that these schools would be handed over to Punjab Education Foundation, which was the subsidiary department of Punjab Education Department.
He told the court that these schools would be run under a public-private partnership. No building will be privatized and the expenditures of these students will be endured by Punjab government.
Assistant Advocate General Usman Khan said all books would be provided free of charge to all students and if a private party violated the agreement, the government would have the authority to cancel the agreement, under Article 25A of the Constitution as it was the duty of the government to provide the best education facilities to the children.
The assistant AG told the court that during 2016, 300,000 and now 600,000 children were getting education under public-private partnerships.
Justice Raheel Kamran Shaikh while talking to the petitioner's lawyers said, “How a court can issue a stay order before reading the detailed reply of the government”. Later IHC adjourned further hearing of the case till June 20.