CMS Under Fire Over Fire Safety Lapses Across Lucknow Campuses, IGRS Activist Urvashi Sharma Demands Accountability Before Another Aliganj like tragedy

 

Geeta Gandhi Kingdon's CMS, 13 Branches and Head Office at Fire Risk, 4 of 5 Cambridge Campuses Fail Fire Norms

 

CMS Under Fire Over Fire Safety Lapses Across Lucknow Campuses, IGRS Activist Urvashi Sharma Demands Accountability Before Another Aliganj like tragedy

 

Lucknow's celebrated educational institution faces uncomfortable questions over student safety as IGRS complaints expose serious fire safety compliance concerns

 

Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.24.08.2026

City Montessori School, one of India's most prominent private school networks and a Guinness World Record holder for the world's largest school by enrolment, is facing serious questions over fire safety compliance at several of its campuses following complaints pursued through the Integrated Grievance Redressal System, IGRS, by social, RTI and IGRS activist Urvashi Sharma.

 

According to the inspection reports on Sharma's complaints, as many as 13 CMS branches and the school's Head Office have been found to have significant fire safety concerns. Even more disturbing, is the fact that four out of the five CMS campuses operating under its Cambridge International Education programme have serious deficiencies concerning mandatory fire safety requirements.

 

List of CMS Cambridge campuses which are at fire risk –

1.     Golf City Campus

2.     Gomtinagar 1 Campus

3.     Gomtinagar Extension Vardan Khand Campus

4.     Rajajipuram 1 Campus

 

 

List of other CMS campuses which are at fire risk –

1.     Aliganj Campus

2.     Asharfabad Campus

3.     Chowk Campus

4.     Indiranagar Campus

5.     Jankipuram Kursi Road Campus

6.     Rajendra Nagar Campus

7.     Station Road Campus

8.     Ayodhya Road Campus

9.     Shalimar Oneworld Campus

10.                        Newly Constructed Head Office

 

 

The allegations assume greater significance in the aftermath of the devastating Aliganj fire tragedy in Lucknow, which raised grave concerns about the consequences of inadequate safety compliance in buildings where large numbers of people are present.

 

CMS itself publicly describes its organisation as operating across more than 20 campuses in Lucknow and currently serving tens of thousands of students. Its official website also states that CMS has constituted Safety and Security Committees at its campuses and has appointed an Environment Health and Safety Officer to inspect campuses and monitor safety implementation. CMS has additionally publicly highlighted fire evacuation drills and fire safety infrastructure at its campuses.

 

It is precisely this contrast between the institution's publicly projected safety standards and the actual deficiencies emerging from Sharma's complaints that has intensified the controversy.

 

A safety activist refuses to look away

Urvashi Sharma has emerged as a persistent voice questioning whether educational institutions can be permitted to place academic reputation, commercial considerations and institutional prestige above the physical safety of children.

 

Her campaign has not been limited to criticism on social media or public statements. She has used the IGRS mechanism to place specific allegations before government authorities and seek official verification and corrective action.

 

Her central argument is straightforward. A school building is not merely a commercial or educational establishment. It is a place where thousands of children spend several hours every day. Fire safety compliance, therefore, cannot be treated as a routine administrative formality.

 

The findings relating to 13 CMS branches and the Head Office have consequently created a much larger public question. If mandatory safety requirements are deficient at multiple locations, how were such establishments allowed to continue functioning without the deficiencies being permanently rectified.

 

Cambridge campuses under particular scrutiny

The controversy becomes particularly sensitive in relation to the CMS Cambridge International Education programme.

 

CMS's own prospectus identifies five Cambridge campuses in Lucknow, Aliganj Campus I, Golf City Campus, Gomti Nagar Extension, Gomti Nagar Campus I and Rajajipuram Campus I.

 

The inspection reports reveal that four of these five Cambridge campuses have serious lapses in mandatory fire safety compliance. Urvashi says that this is something devastatingly serious because Cambridge education is marketed as an international standard educational programme. Parents paying substantially higher fees for such education are entitled to expect that the buildings in which their children study comply fully with every applicable fire and building safety requirement.

 

The issue is therefore not merely whether fire extinguishers or mock drills exist. The real issue is whether every mandatory statutory requirement concerning fire prevention, evacuation, access, exits, firefighting systems, occupancy, building safety and valid approvals is continuously complied with.

 

The question of money versus safety

Sharma has gone considerably further in her criticism of the CMS management.

 

She has accused the management, including its prominent leadership like Ms. Bharti Gandhi and Ms. Geeta Gandhi Kingdon, of prioritising revenue generation and institutional expansion over the safety interests of students. Sharma's contention raises an important public-interest question.

 

When parents pay substantial fees, particularly for premium international education, they are not merely purchasing academic instruction. They are entrusting their children to the institution for several hours every working day.

 

The responsibility of the management therefore extends far beyond examination results, international events, infrastructure and brand reputation.

 

No educational achievement can compensate for the loss of a child's life in a preventable fire.

 

A disturbing contradiction

CMS has built a powerful international reputation around education, global citizenship and student welfare.

 

The school's official website says that its mission is to create a better future for children and that the institution seeks to provide education of the highest quality. CMS also highlights its UNESCO recognition and Guinness World Record status.

 

Its own published material states that safety committees operate at campuses and that an Environment Health and Safety Officer is responsible for inspecting campuses and checking implementation of safety norms.

 

Against this backdrop, fact that multiple campuses have serious fire safety deficiencies create an obvious accountability gap.

 

The alleged deficiencies are genuine and must be rectified without delay.There can be no acceptable middle ground when thousands of children are involved.

 

Urvashi says that the most serious concern for her is that the CMS campus and Head Office located on the road named after CMS founder, Late Jagdish Gandhi, have also failed to meet mandatory fire safety norms.

 

Questions for political leadership

The controversy also raises questions extending beyond CMS itself.

 

CMS is one of Lucknow's most visible educational institutions and its functions frequently attract prominent public personalities, political leaders and influential members of society.

 

Sharma argues that the presence of political leaders at institutional functions should never be interpreted as an endorsement of regulatory compliance.

 

The question she has effectively placed before the political establishment is whether public representatives attending prestigious institutional events also have a responsibility to take notice when credible complaints concerning the safety of children are placed before government authorities.

 

The issue transcends political parties.

 

Whether a leader belongs to the ruling party or the opposition, the safety of schoolchildren should be a matter of public concern.

 

Where were the regulators

Perhaps the most uncomfortable question concerns government authorities.

 

As Sharma's allegations concerning multiple campuses are ultimately established, accountability cannot stop with the school management.

 

Fire safety regulation, building permissions, occupancy requirements and educational recognition involve different governmental authorities and statutory mechanisms.

 

The obvious public-interest question is how an institution operating numerous large campuses in the state capital could allegedly continue with serious deficiencies if those deficiencies existed for an extended period.

 

The responsibility of regulatory agencies is not merely to respond after a tragedy.

 

Their fundamental responsibility is prevention.

 

The Aliganj tragedy has already demonstrated the terrible consequences that can follow when safety risks are ignored, overlooked or inadequately addressed.

 

Why Sharma's campaign matters

What distinguishes Sharma's campaign is the personal risk involved in challenging an institution of enormous public visibility and influence.

 

Taking on a major educational organisation is rarely an easy task for an individual activist. It can attract institutional resistance, criticism and social pressure.

 

Yet Sharma has continued to pursue the matter through formal government grievance mechanisms.

 

Her approach is significant because it shifts the debate from rhetoric to records.

 

Instead of merely asking parents to be concerned, she has sought governmental scrutiny of the underlying compliance position.

 

Her message to parents is equally direct.

 

Do not rely solely on the reputation of an institution.

 

Do not assume that a famous school automatically means a completely compliant building.

 

Ask whether the campus where your child studies possesses all mandatory fire and building safety approvals and whether those approvals remain valid and applicable to the actual structure and occupancy.

 

The larger lesson

The issue raised by Urvashi Sharma ultimately goes beyond City Montessori School.

 

It concerns the fundamental question of whether India's educational institutions can be permitted to build enormous reputations while safety compliance remains a matter left largely to paperwork and periodic inspection.

 

A school may possess world-class teachers, excellent examination results, international affiliations and prestigious awards.

 

But the most basic measure of an educational institution is whether a child can enter its premises in the morning and return home safely in the evening.

 

That is the standard against which every school must ultimately be judged.

 

For Sharma, the campaign is therefore not about CMS alone.

 

It is about forcing the system to answer a much harder question before another tragedy occurs.

 

If a credible complaint identifies a potential threat to the lives of children, should an activist remain silent because the institution is powerful and prestigious, or should she continue knocking on the doors of the administration until the alleged danger is independently investigated.

 

Sharma has chosen the second path.

 

Now the responsibility rests with the authorities.

 

And ultimately, with CMS management.

 

The public deserves to know whether every campus is fully compliant, not merely whether the institution has a distinguished name.