Team Herald
PANJIM: The school academic year in Goa is unlikely to begin on April 1, since the government is yet to comply with notifying an amendment to the rules under Section 29 of the Goa School Education Act.
Disposing of the writ petition filed by Manuel Sidney Antao and seven others on the matter on Monday, the High Court of Bombay at Goa noted the government’s statement that a new rule would be notified this week, facilitating the start of the academic year for students in classes 1 to 5 in June, while classes 6 to 10 and class 12 would commence in the second week of April.
Advocate Vivek Rodrigues, counsel for the petitioners, confirmed that the High Court's order aligned with the statement made by Advocate General Devidas Pangam. Rodrigues emphasised that the government had failed to adhere to the mandatory requirements of Section 29 of the School Education Act, particularly regarding the notification of changes to the academic calendar.
The Court also observed that the draft notification for amending Rule 21 of the Goa Education Rules had initially provided an insufficient five-day window for objections and suggestions. Acknowledging this shortcoming, Advocate General Pangam informed the Court that the deadline for submitting objections has now been extended until March 27, 2025.
As of now, the Directorate of Education has received over 200 objections and suggestions to the draft amendment. Once these are considered, a final notification will be issued to amend the rules of the Goa School Education Act, after which the new academic year will be officially announced.
The Court pointed out that the draft amendment required a seven-day break between the end of the previous academic year and the start of the new term, which had not been factored into the initial plan.
While disposing of the writ petition, the Court left open the petitioners’ right to challenge any new notification, should it be deemed illegal or unconstitutional.
This ruling effectively halts the reopening of schools in Goa on April 1, with the exact date to be determined after the government considers the feedback received. Advocate Rodrigues lauded the Court’s order, describing it as a victory for the petitioners and the broader community, emphasizing that the decision upheld the principles of transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.