It cited the absence of requisite consent, clearances and approvals for starting classes and other activities at the school in Phyang.The notice also referred to a September 22 application by Angmo seeking a no-objection certificate for proposed members of the school's managing committee and said the matter concerning HIAL was sub judice before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. It called for maintaining status quo until the court's final decision or further directions.At a press conference, Angmo disputed both grounds cited in the notice, alleging that the administration had failed to clarify approval requirements despite repeated correspondence.
Wangchuk described the action as a "witch hunt" against those questioning the administration's policies in Ladakh. HIGH COURT ORDER ON LAND DISPUTEAngmo said the land dispute dates back to August last year, when the Deputy Commissioner's office questioned HIAL's continued occupation of the land, citing the absence of a signed lease deed for eight years.She said HIAL had written five letters, made around 10 visits to government offices and placed nearly 50 phone calls seeking execution of the lease deed.
However, the administration had not finalised its lease policy. She added that officials had assured HIAL in writing that several institutions, including government establishments, were operating without signed lease deeds and that it could continue construction after receiving a no-objection certificate.
Angmo said nearly 2.5 lakh square feet of passive solar-heated infrastructure had been constructed on the land with funding from donors and public sector undertakings.After Wangchuk's release in March, the administration had assured them that the land-related issues would be resolved. With no progress by September 2026, HIAL approached the high court.
Citing its September 11 order, Angmo said the court had restrained the administration from creating third-party rights over the land and allowed HIAL to continue its activities until the case was decided.She maintained that the school, whose construction began in 2023 and was completed last year, was covered by the order.SIX LETTERS SEEKING APPROVALSOn the issue of school approvals, Angmo said the registration process had been initiated under SRO 2010. However, officials asked her to obtain an NOC from the DC's office certifying that the school's managing committee had no political members.Questioning the requirement, she said the relevant SRO did not explicitly mandate such a certificate.
She claimed the DC's office had also indicated that it was not required, leading to confusion between different officials.Angmo said she had written six letters to the authorities since September, including to the DC and Director of School Education. Her last communication was sent on October 30, reminding them that the school would open on November 2.
She alleged that officials had not responded despite repeated visits and phone calls.She also questioned why the notice was issued only after classes had begun, arguing that infrastructure, furniture and teaching staff could be inspected as part of the approval process after a school started functioning."We demand a written answer to the six letters that we have written since September," she said.46 CHILDREN ENROLLED, PARENTS BACK SCHOOLAngmo said 46 children had enrolled in the kindergarten section, while teachers interviewed the previous year had been waiting for the school to open. She said parents had repeatedly urged the management to begin classes after waiting nearly two years, with some delaying admissions elsewhere in anticipation of its opening.According to her, parents had submitted representations to the Divisional Commissioner, DC and other officials, urging them not to disrupt the school's functioning.Clarifying that Desert Flower was a non-profit initiative within the HIAL ecosystem, Angmo said it would eventually develop into a residential school.
The current kindergarten section would also facilitate teacher training and practical learning.Wangchuk alleged that the action was part of a wider campaign against those questioning the administration's policies on alcohol, tourism, land and environmental protection. He also cited HIAL's international recognition, including its pedagogy being showcased at London's Victoria and Albert Museum.He alleged that the notice was intended to create confusion among parents and damage the institution's reputation.The couple said they would abide by the court's final decision but maintained that the administration should not interfere while the matter remained sub judice.- EndsWith inputs from Ashraf Wani