The Calcutta High Court has expressed serious concern over the lack of proper road access to two schools in South 24 Parganas, where students are allegedly being forced to pass through marshy and waterlogged land to reach a newly constructed school building. The Court observed that the absence of a proper access road was creating considerable difficulty for students, particularly because children from two schools have to reach the new building of Baneswarpur RDBPM School to avail themselves of midday meals. Taking note of the difficulties faced by the students, the High Court has directed the State Government to place its response before the Court and explain the situation.
The matter arose from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Rabindranath Saha, who approached the Calcutta High Court seeking proper road connectivity to Baneswarpur RDBPM School from the nearest main road. The petition highlights the absence of an appropriate access route to the educational institution and the resulting difficulties faced by students, teachers and other persons who need to reach the school. The PIL seeks intervention from the authorities so that students are not compelled to negotiate unsafe or unsuitable terrain merely to attend school and access basic facilities.
The proceedings were heard by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty. During the hearing, the Bench took note of the conditions surrounding the school and expressed concern about the manner in which students were required to reach the institution. The Court observed that the school was presently surrounded by marshy land and that people attempting to reach the school had to make their way through the marshland because there was no proper access road.
The Court's concern was not confined merely to the inconvenience caused by the absence of a road. The Bench specifically emphasised the need for the school environment to remain healthy and secure for children receiving education. The Court observed that it was concerned about the school being conducted in a healthy atmosphere and about securing the future of students studying in the two institutions. This observation indicates that the Court viewed the issue as one involving the basic conditions under which children are expected to access education rather than treating it as an ordinary dispute relating to infrastructure.
The problem is particularly serious because students from Baneswarpur RDBPM School and ROSA Dogachha FP School are required to reach the new building of Baneswarpur RDBPM School for their midday meals. According to the report, there is no proper access road leading to the new building, leaving the students to face considerable difficulty while travelling to the location. The Court specifically recorded that the students were experiencing difficulties because of the absence of an access road.
The midday meal aspect makes the issue particularly important from the perspective of children's welfare. The midday meal programme is intended to ensure that schoolchildren receive nutritional support while attending educational institutions. In the present case, however, the students are reportedly required to undertake a difficult journey through marshy land to reach the building where the meals are provided. The Court's intervention therefore concerns not merely physical connectivity but also the practical accessibility of an essential facility being provided to schoolchildren.
The petitioner's grievance is essentially that a school building has been constructed without ensuring adequate connectivity from the nearest main road. While the existence of a school building is important, the Court's observations underline that infrastructure must also be practically accessible. A school that cannot be safely reached by students creates a serious problem, particularly when children have to cross marshy terrain. The PIL therefore seeks to bring the authorities' attention to the gap between construction of the educational facility and provision of basic infrastructure necessary to access it.
During the hearing, the State's counsel informed the Court that the State would file an affidavit providing a clear picture of the situation. The counsel indicated that the affidavit would explain the circumstances surrounding the absence of the road and the existing infrastructure. The State also submitted that the PIL was not adversarial litigation. This suggests that the proceedings are being viewed primarily as a public-interest exercise aimed at finding a practical solution rather than as a conventional dispute between opposing private parties.
The Division Bench directed that the State's affidavit-in-opposition be filed on or before September 24, 2026. The affidavit is expected to provide the Court with a clearer factual position concerning the schools, the existing road infrastructure and the steps, if any, taken by the authorities to address the accessibility problem. The filing of the affidavit will allow the Court to assess what action may be required from the government and the concerned local authorities.
The Court has also given specific directions concerning the preparation of a sketch map. The petitioner's advocate has been directed to prepare a map showing the portion of the road that has already been concretised, the location of both schools and the distance of each school from the concretised portion of the road. This direction is significant because it will enable the Court to obtain a visual and factual understanding of the existing connectivity and the precise portion where the road infrastructure is lacking.
The requirement of a sketch map indicates that the Court wants the issue to be examined on the basis of concrete physical details rather than general allegations. The map will help identify the existing road, the schools and the distance between the two. It can also assist in determining what additional construction or connectivity may be required to ensure that students can safely reach the school buildings.
The High Court has further permitted the petitioner to implead the District Panchayat and Rural Development Officer, South 24 Parganas, as a respondent in the proceedings. The Court directed that this addition be carried out forthwith. The involvement of the district-level Panchayat and Rural Development authority is potentially important because rural road connectivity and related infrastructure may fall within the responsibilities of local or district authorities. Bringing the concerned officer before the Court will enable the Bench to obtain information directly from the authority responsible for relevant development and rural infrastructure matters.
The case has been registered as WPA(P) 387 of 2026, titled Rabindranath Saha v. The State of West Bengal & Ors. The proceedings are being considered as a public interest matter because the issue affects schoolchildren collectively rather than merely one individual. The Court's approach also demonstrates the role of PIL jurisdiction in addressing deficiencies in public infrastructure that directly affect access to education and the welfare of children.
The Court's intervention is particularly relevant because access to education cannot be viewed only in terms of admission or availability of a school building. Students must also have a reasonably safe and accessible route to reach the institution. If children have to cross marshy land or waterlogged areas to attend classes or obtain their midday meals, the practical availability of educational facilities can be severely compromised. The Court's concern about the health and future of students reflects this broader understanding of educational access.
The issue also raises questions concerning the responsibility of public authorities to coordinate different aspects of school infrastructure. Construction of a school building without adequate approach-road connectivity can create a situation in which public expenditure on the building does not translate into effective access for beneficiaries. The present PIL gives the Court an opportunity to examine whether the concerned authorities have adequately planned road connectivity along with educational infrastructure.
The Court has, however, not yet issued a final direction requiring immediate construction of a particular road or fixed a specific agency responsible for completing the work. At this stage, the Bench has sought the State's response and directed the petitioner to provide a sketch map containing the relevant physical details. The next stage of the proceedings will therefore depend substantially upon the affidavit filed by the State and the material placed before the Court.
The matter has been listed under the Urgent Admission category for September 28, 2026. Before that date, the State is required to file its affidavit-in-opposition by September 24. The Court will then have the opportunity to consider the State's explanation, the petitioner's map and the positions of the concerned authorities. The impleadment of the District Panchayat and Rural Development Officer will also ensure that the district-level authority is formally involved in the proceedings.
The High Court's observations also highlight the vulnerability of schoolchildren when basic public infrastructure is inadequate. Children cannot reasonably be expected to overcome difficult terrain or unsafe pathways simply to reach educational facilities. The fact that the affected students reportedly need to travel through marshland to access their midday meals makes the problem particularly pressing. The Court's emphasis on providing a healthy and secure environment demonstrates that infrastructure surrounding a school can directly affect the overall educational experience and welfare of children.
The proceedings further demonstrate the importance of judicial monitoring in public-interest infrastructure matters. Rather than immediately assigning blame, the Court has sought factual clarification from the State and required the petitioner to produce a detailed map. This approach allows the Court to understand the precise nature of the problem before determining what remedial measures may be appropriate. The State's proposed affidavit is therefore likely to be an important document in the next stage of the case.
At the same time, the Court's observations make clear that the matter is being treated with urgency. The Bench has expressly recorded its concern regarding the difficulties faced by students and their need to travel through marshy land. The direction to file the affidavit within a defined period and the listing of the matter under the Urgent Admission category indicate that the Court intends to monitor the issue rather than allow the petition to remain pending without a response.
The case ultimately centres on a basic but significant question: whether students should be required to face unsafe and difficult conditions merely to access their school and essential school facilities. The Calcutta High Court's intervention suggests that the answer must be found through practical infrastructure measures. The Court will now examine the existing road network, the location of the two schools, the responsibilities of the concerned government and local authorities and the steps required to provide students with safe access.
In conclusion, the Calcutta High Court has sought a response from the West Bengal Government concerning the lack of proper road connectivity to Baneswarpur RDBPM School and the resulting difficulties faced by students of two schools in South 24 Parganas. The Court has expressed concern that children are being forced to negotiate marshy land to reach the new school building where midday meals are provided. The Bench of Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty has directed the State to file its affidavit-in-opposition by September 24, 2026, while the petitioner's advocate has been asked to prepare a sketch map showing the existing concretised road, the two schools and their respective distances from that road. The District Panchayat and Rural Development Officer, South 24 Parganas, has also been permitted to be added as a respondent. The matter will next be considered on September 28, 2026.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.