Another judgment that reshapes inclusive education
27th December, 2025.
[The Disability Law Initiative reviews a remarkable judgment of the Delhi High Court earlier this year that fostered inclusive education.]
What began as a mother’s heartfelt plea for her daughter’s right to be in the classroom has become a landmark moment in India’s journey toward inclusive education. Six-year-old Aadriti Pathak, diagnosed with mild autism, was admitted to GD Goenka Public School under the sibling quota. What should have been a joyful start turned into a struggle, as the school failed to provide essential support like a shadow teacher and did not foster a welcoming environment for her. Within a few months, Aadriti had stopped attending classes—not because her parents withdrew her, but because the school could not accommodate her needs.
Aadriti’s parents approached the Delhi High Court seeking justice. On 1st July 2025, Justice Vikas Mahajan delivered a judgment that could reshape how schools in Delhi—and potentially across India—approach inclusive education.
The petition before the Delhi High Court
Aadriti’s mother argued before the court that the that the school’s refusal to provide necessary accommodations violated the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, particularly Sections 3, 16, and 31, which guarantee inclusive education and prohibit discrimination. She countered the schools claim that Aadriti had been voluntarily withdrawn in the first instance, and that thereafter there were no vacancies for her to be readmitted.
The judgment: belongingness, not just access
The Court held that Aadriti’s withdrawal was caused by the school’s failure to integrate her effectively—not parental choice. Justice Mahajan’s order went beyond procedural formalities, emphasizing that inclusive education is not symbolic—it is enforceable.
The Court highlighted:
“Every child has a place in the classroom not because they are the same, but because they are different—and that difference enriches the learning environment for all.”
On the Court’s directions, an Expert Committee was constituted to assess Aadriti’s admission suitability and the accommodations required for her effective participation. Based on the Committee’s recommendations, the Court issued specific directions ensuring that Aadriti’s learning environment would be adapted to her needs. The Court emphasized that inclusion requires empathy, understanding, and proactive institutional support—not just formal compliance.
Directions issued by the Court
The Court directed the following:
• Immediate readmission of Aadriti into Class I (or age-appropriate class) within two weeks.
• Permission for a parent-appointed shadow teacher, subject to school discipline rules.
• Monitoring by the Directorate of Education to ensure a discrimination-free, inclusive environment.
• Submission of a compliance affidavit by the school within four weeks detailing steps taken.
Case References
• Aadriti Pathak v. G.D. Goenka Public School, W.P.(C) 13490/2024, Delhi High Court, Justice Vikas Mahajan — Judgment dated 01/07/2025, Neutral Citation: 2025 DHC 5048.
• G.D. Goenka Public School v. Aadriti Pathak & Anr., LPA 499/2025, Division Bench, Delhi High Court — Judgment dated 23/09/2025, Neutral Citation: 2025 DHC 6123.