Coaching Centres With More Than 20 Students Have To Move Out Of Residential Areas: Delhi HC

The case comes after a fire broke out at a coaching centre in Mukherjee Nagar last year, prompting the high court to take suo motu cognizance of the incident.

Locals gather at the site after a fire broke out at a coaching institute, at Mukherjee Nagar area in New Delhi last year. ( Image Source :PTI )

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court issued a directive stating that coaching centres with over 20 students must relocate from residential areas and operate from commercial spaces, news agency PTI reported. A bench led by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan, during the hearing of a petition filed by the Coaching Federation of India, expressed concern over the safety risks faced by students attending coaching centres in residential buildings lacking adequate safety infrastructure like two staircases.

The court stressed the need for coaching centres with a large number of students to transition to commercial premises, stating, "You cannot operate from a residential area. Where students are more than 20, you must move out."

The petition challenged the classification of coaching centres as "educational buildings" under the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) Unified Building Bye Laws-2016 (UBBL-2016), arguing that such categorisation imposes specific fire safety requirements on coaching centres.

Advocate Rajeshwari Hariharan, representing the petitioner, highlighted the arbitrary nature of the 2020 notification by the DDA, which classified coaching centres as educational institutes. The court directed the matter to be heard before another division bench dealing with fire safety issues at coaching units, stating that it cannot revoke a notification issued in 2020 concerning public safety, PTI reported.

“The DDA has come up with a notification classifying me as an educational institute. The notification come out in 2020. We are seeking that the notification must go and we need a clarification,” PTI quoted Hariharan as saying.

The petitioner's lawyer noted the distinction between coaching centres and educational institutes, noting that coaching centres do not confer degrees or diplomas upon completion of courses. The petition argued that the notification violated constitutional provisions and disregarded relevant regulations governing the establishment and classification of buildings.

In response, Hariharan emphasised that coaching centres are willing to adhere to fire safety norms and undergo safety audits but should not be subject to the same regulations as educational institutes.

The case comes after a fire broke out at a coaching centre in Mukherjee Nagar last year, prompting the high court to take suo motu cognizance of the incident. The fire, which originated from an electricity meter board, led to a chaotic evacuation with students resorting to using ropes to descend from the building. The incident underscored the urgency of ensuring adequate safety measures at coaching centres.