Managing Primary School Education of the
Underprivileged in S Block
One has rarely seen polaris-ation in the colony around an issue, which it is now witnessing regarding the continuity of Vidya, an NGO that is running a school in S block for between 200 and 250 underprivileged children.
The Memorandum of Understanding between the Society and Vidya is ending in March 2025, and, as per the norm, a one-year notice was served on them by the Managing Committee around Feb-Mar 2024, arguably to initiate negotiation of terms for continuity.
Since then, things have heated up. The noise rose to a crescendo in the Special General Body Meeting (SGBM), which was held on October 13, 2024, where a decision was to be taken regarding the continuity of Vidya as the Society’s partner for managing the school beyond the current MOU expiry date. This SGBM saw one of the highest turnouts, to deliberate and decide on this issue.
As any truth is complex, so is this one. There appears to be unanimity amongst all that.
1. The future of the 200-odd children studying in the school should not be compromised and the continuity of their education is a priority.
2. The 2.4-acre land, only part of which is being used by Vidya to run the school and which has been leased to the Society solely to run a pre-primary/primary school, must be protected with an unambiguous agreement between the Society and the NGO, Vidya or otherwise, which will run the school beyond March 2025
Madhu Singh, the Schools’ Subcommittee Chairperson, went on record during the SGM, praising the performance of Vidya over these years and there was no specific agenda to oust Vidya but only to discuss an agreement on fair terms, for their continuity.
On the face of it, this ought to mean that the Managing Committee should sit across the table, duly authorised by the GB, to carve out an agreement that was financially cost-neutral or even a little favorable to the Society, as a contribution to manage its affairs. Since there was no dissatisfaction per se, with Vidya, this negotiation could have been held with them to create a win-win situation.
Unfortunately, the opposing faction seems to believe that a move is afoot to dislodge Vidya. Many residents have witnessed the benefit of this education received by their housekeepers’ and drivers’ kids and they fear the consequence of implementing alternatives to this and the colony’s eco-system. In their keenness to protect the interest of these children and, worried about the intent of the existing decision drivers to allegedly make a ‘financial gain’ out of this venture, Vidya has received an outpouring of support to the extent that it is now feared by some that this may even compromise reaching an agreement on fair terms.
The SGBM was expected to resolve this imbroglio, and it was expected that a resolution would be placed before the General Body to do so. Unfortunately, that has not happened, and the matter might have just got worse.
The resolution placed before the GB during the meeting read, “resolved that on the expiry of Memorandum of Understanding and the Revocable Deed of license, both dated 19th October 2013, on 15th March 2025, the demised premises must revert to PCHBS Ltd. Meanwhile, a suitable organization/NGO be identified to run the school under the aegis of our Society, on terms and conditions in the interest of our society, within the legal framework.”
Two things about this resolution were interesting.
One was that, whilst the initial speech appreciated Vidya, there was no specific mention of Vidya in the resolution. Because of this, some people have called it “mischievous” and “clever” and feel that it shows an intention to replace Vidya. The faction in favor believes that the resolution does not preclude the continuity of Vidya. It is only meant to strengthen the MC’s hands to reinforce the Society’s claim of ‘custodianship’ of this piece of land, make a clear demarcation of the area under use by Vidya in the agreement, and ensure a financially ‘reasonable’ deal to the Society.
The second thing was that the resolution did not put up any alternatives before the GB to decide between options. To that extent, some members wondered why the GB was even called if no alternatives were ready. They felt that alternate approaches to running the operations could have been presented, with clear-cut financials and a comparison with the existing one, to make an informed decision as a GB.
In summary, the resolution did not inspire conviction or trust amongst the opposing faction.
The matter has gotten complicated because of a controversy as to whether the resolution got more votes in favor or more against. The rigor of the voting process was questionable. The opposing faction got together within the meeting room and apparently, 44 of them signed their declaration ‘against’ the resolution at the end before dispersing, whilst the organizers feel that the resolution was passed by 32 for and 17 against. Of course, the minutes of the meeting will be a formal announcement of the recorded outcome, and this may not resolve matters.
The battle is likely to become murkier, with stances hardening on both sides. This is not something for us to be proud of. Solutions of mediation may need to be explored to help build consensus and a reasonable way forward that represents a collective sentiment of the Society.
We hope that the two most important points of unanimity can remain the focal area for both factions in building this resolution in a civil fashion. In the meantime, one does wonder what actions will be taken, considering that Vidya’s end of tenure is just five months away and GB has not really taken any decision regarding the same.
