In a sensitive dispute involving parental rights and a child’s education, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has ruled that a biological father cannot be excluded from his minor son’s school records merely because of marital discord. The Gwalior Bench allowed a writ appeal and directed a private unaided school to record the father’s name and ensure limited academic access, stressing that the child’s welfare and statutory duties under education law must prevail.
Background of the Case
The appeal was filed by Vickramh Kkalmady, the biological father of an eight-year-old child studying in Little Angels High School, Gwalior. Earlier, the child had studied in Bengaluru, where school records consistently mentioned the appellant as the father.
Read also:- Cooling-Off Period Not Mandatory: Gujarat High Court Revives Mutual Consent Divorce Appeal
After matrimonial disputes arose, the parents became embroiled in multiple legal proceedings, including custody-related matters. Despite court orders granting visitation rights and evidence that the father regularly paid school fees, the school allegedly refused to include his name in the child’s records or grant him access to academic information such as report cards and the school application login.
When the school did not act even after directions from district education authorities, the father approached the High Court. A single judge dismissed his writ petition on maintainability, prompting the present appeal.
Arguments Before the Court
Counsel for the appellant argued that schools perform public functions under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act). Since the child fell within the age group of six to fourteen years, maintaining proper records - including details of parents - was a statutory obligation.
Read also:- Lalu Prasad Yadav Challenges Framing of Charges in IRCTC Scam Case Before Delhi High Court
The State authorities acknowledged that they had issued letters asking the school to correct the records. The school management, on the other hand, raised concerns that granting direct access might disturb the child, citing alleged past conduct of the father. The child’s mother opposed unrestricted access, citing apprehensions about communication with school staff.
Court’s Observations
The Division Bench closely examined the scope of maintainability. It held that while private unaided schools are not “State” in the strict sense, they discharge statutory public duties under the RTE Act. Where a public law element exists, a writ petition is maintainable.
“The relief sought relates directly to statutory duties under the RTE Act,” the bench observed, clarifying that the earlier Supreme Court ruling relied upon by the writ court applied to service disputes, not to cases affecting children’s educational rights.
The judges emphasised that school records form the foundation for future public documents such as Aadhaar, passport, and bank records. Excluding the biological father’s name, when paternity is undisputed, would be against both law and the child’s best interests.
The court also noted that parental disputes cannot be allowed to undermine a child’s identity or educational development. Welfare of the child, it said, remains paramount.
The Decision
Allowing the appeal, the High Court set aside the earlier dismissal and issued clear directions. The school was ordered to correct its records and include the appellant’s name as the father of the child. District education authorities were directed to ensure compliance under the RTE Act.
Read also:- Chhattisgarh Excise Scam: High Court Grants Bail to Chaitanya Baghel in ED and ACB Cases
At the same time, the court balanced competing concerns by limiting the father’s access. He would receive information about the child’s academic progress through the school application but would not directly engage with teachers or staff. Any conduct detrimental to the child’s welfare was expressly barred.
With these directions, the appeal was allowed and disposed of.
Case Title: Vickramh Kkalmady v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Case No.: WA No. 2559 of 2025
Case Type: Writ Appeal (Education / Parental Rights)
Decision Date: 17 December 2025
