The court noted that coaching institutes flourish in Delhi and NCR despite the space crunch and this is a matter of concern as there is no oversight mechanism to ensure that they provide adequate safety measures for students.

“You cannot convert residential areas into coaching institutes. This is not good for students nor for the neighbourhood,” said the bench, also comprising justice Ujjal Bhuyan.

After its order in September, appointing senior advocate Siddharth Dave as amicus curiae to examine various aspects of the matter and suggest broad guidelines, Dave presented a note informing the court about some state specific laws related to running coaching institutes. He pointed out that even the Centre had issued guidelines in this regard in January this year.

“There must be a permanent oversight mechanism as these measures have to be preventive. In Delhi, space crunch can be there. But that does not mean that health norms won’t be followed,” the bench said.

The judges raised further concerns about making these coaching institutes disabled-friendly. “We have legislations for inclusive growth. Tomorrow there will be specially-abled persons attending these classes. There must be access, besides providing for their basic needs.”

Dave said many of the coaching institutes also provide accommodation facilities and these aspects also need to be considered while preparing the guidelines. The court added, “This will also concern security of girl students. It should be a safe premise for them.”

Posting the matter to a date after two weeks, the bench said, “The suggestions from Centre and states shall be sent to the amicus curiae who shall examine the desirability of having a comprehensive regulation or policy dealing with all coaching institutions in Delhi-NCR.”

The lawyers for Delhi Development Authority, Delhi government were present in court. The bench also sought responses from Uttar Pradesh and Haryana governments as it said, “You need to have a uniform pattern whether it be Faridabad, Gurugram, or Noida. It should not be that students of one part of NCR are forced to go to another part of NCR.”

Dave in his note emphasised the need for a uniform policy. He said, “The lack of a single uniform compliance regime creates hurdles not only for the occupiers or owners of coaching classes, but also to government entities.”

In January this year, the ministry of education issued the Guidelines for Regulation of Coaching Centres. One of these guidelines provides for the adherence to fire safety codes by coaching classes. It also provides for requirement of medical assistance, helpline numbers, ventilation, lighting, drinking water, etc. for students.

The suo motu proceedings were initiated by the court while hearing a petition filed by the Coaching Federation of India challenging an order of the Delhi high court passed on December 14, 2023, requiring coaching institutes to obtain a mandatory fire no-objection certificate (NOC) and certificate in terms of the Master Plan for Delhi-2021 and Safety Norms for Buildings/Structures under the Unified Building Byelaws, 2016.

Extending the scope of consideration beyond Delhi, the bench observed that coaching institutes cannot become “death chambers” while describing the three deaths that took place in Delhi as an “eye-opener” to ensure meticulous compliance of fire safety norms necessary for students, besides other basic amenities such as proper ventilation, safety passage, air and light, etc necessary for dignified human life.