Parents angry as St Saupin’s fails to conduct draw of lots for admissions
- Elections 2014 LIVE: Kejriwal holds roadshow in Varanasi before filing nomination
- Mulayam Yadav calls Narendra Modi a liar, says he changes 500 kurtas a day
- Bhavnagar model: Muslim buys house, canât move in
- 12-yr-olds also voted in this Bihar village
- Shazia says Muslims should become 'communal' when they vote
With no draw of lots held for finalising the names for admissions to the entry-level class in Saupin's School, Sector 32, parents raised objection against it on Thursday resulting in a ruckus at the school premises.
Parents alleged that the school managements had put up the list without following any criteria or any transparent system.
When no one listened to the grievances of the parents, they called the police, forcing the authorities of Saupin's School to reply to their questions.
Station House Officer of Police Station Sector 34, Inspector Diwan Singh, said that there was misunderstanding among the parents and principal which was later sorted out.
However, Vice-Principal of Saupin's school, Sarita Sharma, assured the aggrieved parents that let the principal come back from Delhi, they would be able to answer the parents' questions.
The school's official spokesperson Aarti Malhotra said that the school had put up a notice on the website that there would be no draw of lots.
Meanwhile in Vivek High School, Sector 38 only one parent had a problem. Talking to Chandigarh Newsline, Director Vivek High School, H S Mamik said that the name of the child in one case did not appear as the parents failed to submit their residence proof. "We never said that the school will hold draw of lots. We are going as per Right To Education," he added.
- Missing plane MH370: Australia plans to use system that found Titanic
- Nandurbar helps me win in Gujarat, it will now help me win India: Narendra Modi
- Run Away Style
- Stakes high for AIADMK, DMK as TN goes to polls
- Six Bengal constituencies go to poll tomorrow in second phase
- Whistleblower alleged kickbacks, favours in ‘thin client’ procurement; NDA never completed inquiry