New Delhi: The tragic death of 3 UPSC aspirants due to flooding of the basement of a coaching centre in Delhi's Rajendra Nagar, brought into focus the issues associated with the capital's civic governance. After more than four months of this incident, senior advocate and amicus curiae Siddhartha Dave has filed in the Supreme Court "draft/model rules on infrastructure, safety and regulation of private coaching institutes." The Amicus is the senior advocate appointed by a court to assist it on a particular issue.
The draft rules propose heavy fines and penalties on a private coaching institute, including the owner, proprietor, or other persons involved in its operation or functioning. State governments have been directed by the top court to consider these guidelines while framing rules.
The draft rules filed by Dave, assisted by advocate Vidhi Pankaj Thaker, said: "In case of violation of any of the provisions of these Rules, a private coaching institute, including the owner, proprietor, or other persons involved in the operation or functioning of such coaching institute, shall be liable, for each such violation, to pay a penalty of rupees fifty thousand for the first violation, and rupees two lacs for the subsequent violation."
The rules said in case the violation still continues, then the registration of the private coaching institute shall be cancelled. It added that the penalty shall be in addition to all other penalties and/or offences committed under all existing applicable laws.
On the aspect of personal and vicarious liability of the owner, proprietor, or other persons, the rules said: "The owner, proprietor, and any other person responsible for the operation or functioning of a coaching institute shall be personally and vicariously liable for any penalties, or offences which may be committed due to the violation of any provisions of these Rules”.
The rules said the personal and vicarious liability of such persons shall extend to any criminal acts, offences, or acts of negligence caused during the operation of such coaching institutes.
The rules said no private coaching institute shall publish or cause to be published any misleading advertisement or give false information relating to coaching in any form, either written, oral, or through social media, or other means of publication.
The rules said no private coaching institute shall be granted registration or shall be permitted to renew its registration unless it has the following amenities– fire safety services, flood prevention mechanism, an experienced full-time student counsellor, a dedicated helpline, a grievance redressal cell, installation of CCTV cameras, a sexual harassment committee etc.
On August 5, the apex court took a suo motu cognisance of the deaths of three UPSC aspirants. The top court had issued notices to the Centre and the Delhi government and observed that the coaching centres had become death chambers, and stressed that authorities must ensure that such incidents don’t occur. Students Shreya Yadav, Tanya Soni and Nevin Delvin lost their lives in the incident on July 27.
The apex court had made it clear that safety standards of coaching centres must be improved across the country and fix liability, and accountability on owners and staff for such incidents.
