The Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, guarantees free and compulsory education for all children. However, it clashes with Article 30, which protects the right of religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer their own educational institutions.
Copyright infringement not intended
Picture Courtesy: INDIAN EXPRESS
The Supreme Court questioned 2014 Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust verdict, which exempted minority educational institutions from the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009.
The RTE Act operationalizes Article 21A of the Constitution. However, the exemption of minority educational institutions (MEIs) from RTE provisions, has sparked legal and social debates.
Ensures free and compulsory education for children aged 6–14 in neighborhood schools.
Mandates 25% reservation in private unaided non-minority schools for EWS and disadvantaged groups (Section 12(1)(c)).
Sets norms for infrastructure, teacher-student ratios (1:30), and quality education.
Prohibits detention until Class 8 (amended in 2019 to remove no-detention policy).
Establishes School Management Committees (SMCs) for participatory governance.
|
Supreme Court in RTE case Society for Unaided Private Schools vs Union of India (2012): Upheld the constitutionality of Section 12(1)(c) but exempted unaided minority schools and boarding schools from RTE provisions. Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust vs Union of India (2014): Granted blanket exemption to both aided and unaided minority institutions from the RTE Act, citing Article 30(1) protections for minority rights. |
Undermining Universal Education: Exemption fragments the “common schooling vision” and weakens inclusivity under Article 21A.
Regulatory Loopholes: Many institutions seek minority status to evade RTE norms, creating “enclaves of privilege” that deprive children of quality education.
Coexistence of Rights: Court said that RTE provisions, including the 25% quota, do not erode minority character under Article 30(1) and can be applied case-by-case, such as admitting disadvantaged children from the same minority community.
TET Applicability: Court upheld Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) as a mandatory requirement for teachers in all schools, including minority institutions, to ensure quality education.
Quality Gaps: The Act focuses on access but lacks mechanisms to ensure uniform quality across schools, institutionalizing inequality.
Exclusion of Age Groups: Exclusion of early childhood (ages 3-6) and secondary education (ages 14-18) leaves critical learning stages unaddressed, a gap the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 seeks to close.
Funding Shortfalls: India allocates less than 4% of GDP to education, below the 6% recommended by Kothari Commission and NEP.
Implementation Gaps: In a 2023 report, the Ministry of Education revealed that only 25.5% of schools complied with all RTE infrastructure norms.
Conflict with Article 30: The blanket exemption for MEIs creates a tension between minority autonomy and universal education, fragmenting shared learning spaces.
Revisit Pramati Ruling: A larger Supreme Court bench should clarify the scope of RTE exemptions, ensuring minority schools admit disadvantaged students from their own communities to balance autonomy and inclusivity.
Strengthen Enforcement: Increase funding to 6% of GDP to meet SDG 4 targets and upgrade school infrastructure, especially in underserved regions.
Expand RTE Scope: Implement NEP 2020’s proposal to extend RTE to ages 3–18, covering early childhood and secondary education.
Regulate Minority Status: Establish a robust verification process to prevent misuse of minority status by elite institutions.
Teacher Training: Enforce TET and continuous professional development to ensure quality education across all schools.
Public Awareness: Promote RTE’s grievance redressal mechanism to empower parents and communities to demand compliance.
Source: INDIAN EXPRESS
|
PRACTICE QUESTION Q. How does the Constitution balance the rights of minorities to establish educational institutions with the state’s obligation to provide universal education? 150 words |
The conflict stems from the RTE Act's mandate for inclusive education, specifically the 25% reservation, clashing with the special right of minorities under Article 30 to administer their institutions without undue state interference.
It is a quasi-judicial body established to safeguard the educational rights of minorities, decide on minority status for institutions, and hear complaints regarding the violation of these rights.
The term is not explicitly defined in the Constitution, which only refers to minorities based on religion or language.
© 2025 iasgyan. All right reserved
