After Delhi High Court rejects the PIL, the civil rights group 'Social Jurist' has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the decision. Their PIL aimed to expedite the finalization of the Delhi School Education (Amendment) Bill, 2015, which seeks to ban the screening procedure in the admission of children at the pre-primary level.

The plea contends that despite the preparation of the bill in 2015, it has not yet been passed into law. The plea asserts that the delay in passing the bill is due to it being caught in a bureaucratic tug-of-war between the Central Government and the Delhi Government. According to the plea, this delay is detrimental to the best interests of children.

In July 2023, the Delhi High Court had rejected the PIL, deeming it not maintainable. The court's decision was based on the premise that it could not intervene in the legislative process.

“It is not proper for this Court to issue any kind of writ to the Governor and interfere in a legislative process whether to accept or reject a Bill within any timeframe. It is not proper for a High Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct a Governor who is a constitutional authority to set a timeframe in matters which come purely within the domain of the Governor. In the considered opinion of this Court, even though the Bill has been passed by the House, it is always open to the Governor to agree or to send the Bill back to the House and this Court ought not to pass a writ of mandamus directing the Governor to act by passing a writ.” the Court said.

The petitioner has invoked the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, as a basis for their argument, emphasizing the bill's necessity in implementing the provisions of this Act.

Further, the petitioner highlighted that the bill aims to eliminate any form of discrimination in children's admissions and serves as a measure to curb the commercialization of education. Furthermore, the petitioner asserts that the unjustified delay of 7 years in passing the bill goes against the public interest.