A vast majority of private schools in the province observed a two-day strike on April 23 and 24 against the implementation of a judgment of the Peshawar High Court by the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Private Schools Regulatory Authority (PSRA). Schools were kept closed for two days as a pressure tactic so that the KP government as well as the high court should concede to their demands.

However, a bench of the court, headed by senior puisne judge Justice Waqar Ahmad Seth, took exception to this move of the private schools. The court authorised the PSRA to take action and make possible the smooth educational activities without any break.

Keeping in view the influence of the management of different chains of private schools, it appears to be an uphill task for the PSRA to implement the court’s judgment.

The court had on Nov 8, 2017, accepted three writ petitions filed by different petitioners, including Peshawar District Bar Association, against the private educational institutions, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government and the regulatory authority on multiple grounds. The court had issued several directives to the PSRA for regulating the affairs of private educational institutions under the KPPSRA Act 2017.

In the light of the court’s judgment the PSRA approved the required regulations on Feb 19 and has subsequently issued a circular to private schools for compliance of the said regulations. The regulations provide that the institutions shall not charge more than half of the tuition fee from second/third children of the same parent.

The PSRA directed that these schools shall charge only maximum of 50 per cent of the tuition fee during vacations of more than 30 days. Furthermore, there shall be complete ban on charging students for transport charges during vacations.

The bench on April 24 took up for hearing joint implementation petition filed by the Peshawar District Bar Association, advocates Farman Ali, Zulfiqar Khalil and others, seeking directives from the court for implementation of its judgment.

The bench issued several directives to the PSRA’s managing director Zafar Ali Shah for implementing the court’s judgment within a month.

One important point discussed by the bench was about the directives it had given in the main judgment that increase in tuition fee shall not be more than 3 per cent per annum. Section 8 (2) (i) of the Act provides that the PSRA shall sanction annual increase in fee not in excess of up to 10 per cent to be charged from the students, but not more than once in an academic year.

The bench while discussing that point observed: “This Act has thoroughly been discussed in para 15 of the judgment, wherein not more than 3 per cent annual increase has been recommended; therefore, respondents are directed to revisit the said provision of Act, 2017 by allowing 3 per cent annual increase.”

An important issue related to the private schools, which was ignored by the PSRA, was that of the teachers employed by them and regulating their services, specially the salary structure. The bench also took note of that and directed: “Since the regulations so formulated are deficient in respect of selection of teachers as well as their salaries; therefore, the authorities are directed to properly categorise the academic qualifications for the appointments of teachers in Primary, Middle and Higher School.”

The bench in its detailed order also directed all the concerned departments/authorities of local government to cooperate with the PSRA, failing which the PSRA was authorised to file a contempt of court petition against those institutions.

Several applications have now been filed with the high court by the aggrieved parents stating that the concerned private schools have not been following the orders of the court.

Several of the institutions claimed that they had filed leave to appeal petitions before the Supreme Court of Pakistan and had been awaiting the outcome of their appeals there.

Advocate Abbas Khan Sangeen, who is representing the petitioners, said that over five months had passed since the high court had delivered its judgment. He said that unless the apex court issues any stay order for suspending the judgment of the high court, it was binding on the educational institutions to abide by that judgment.

He believes that by not following the court’s judgment these private schools had been committing contempt of the high court.

It was in 2012 when then high court’s chief justice Dost Mohammad Khan had taken notice of the non-regulation of the affairs of private educational institutions and had directed then provincial government to enact a comprehensive law in this regard as the then law, KP Registration and Functioning of Private Educational Institutions Ordinance, 2001, had several loopholes.

The then government had tabled the KPPSRA Bill 2012 in Dec 2012, but it could not be passed. It took the present government four years to enact the PSRA Act 2017, which provides for setting up of a regulatory authority.

The regulatory authority is having multiple functions, including registration and regulation of schools, supervision of their curricula, scheme of studies, academic schedule, ensuring observance of summer, winter, spring and other holidays in schools; implementing criteria for categorisation of schools to ensure minimum standards of education and facilities in each category; prescribe minimum qualification and training programmes for teachers of different categories of schools; sanction annual increase in fee, etc.

Some of the petitioners also raised the issue before Supreme Court Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar during his recent visit to Peshawar and had requested him to decide the appeals at the earliest as the private schools had not been following the high court’s verdict on the pretext that their appeals are pending before the apex court.

It would be in the interest of thousands of students that the Supreme Court may decide those appeals so that the managements of private schools could not delay the issue on this pretext.

Published in Dawn, April 30th, 2018