RTE Act Not Implemented In Punjab for 15 Years? Supreme Court Issues Notice On PIL

The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice V. Mohana was hearing the plea which raises concerns over the alleged denial of fundamental rights through the non-implementation of the RTE Act.

At the outset, the petitioner-in-person submitted that several schools in Punjab were not implementing the Act at all. However, the CJI referred to the State's response and observed: “No, the government has filed a counter saying such students have been admitted from EWS category in private schools.”

Disputing the State's position, the petitioner argued that the numbers disclosed by the government were grossly inadequate. “At least 50,000 students had to be admitted. RTI says no one admitted in some schools for 15 years,” he submitted.

The Court, however, indicated that broader data would be necessary before it could examine the allegations. “Conduct a study and find out how many schools have refused it,” the CJI told the petitioner.

Emphasising the need for precise information, the Bench observed that the issue could not be examined merely on broad assertions that the law had not been implemented.

During the hearing, the petitioner contended that the problem was not limited to individual schools but extended across the State. “Not just the schools, in the entire state the Act has not been implemented for the past 15 years. The court had specifically directed that its judgment will apply to all schools,” he argued.

The CJI responded by pointing to the State's affidavit claiming implementation of the statute. “Therefore we want to know from you which schools are not implementing. State has filed an affidavit saying 476 children belonging to EWS and disadvantaged groups have been admitted in private schools.”

The petitioner maintained that the issue had surfaced only after sustained litigation. “Only when this petitioner went to the High Court and brought to the notice of the High Court that this Act is not implemented then they issued the direction,” he said.

The Bench reiterated that concrete evidence would be required. “You have to help us how it is not being implemented,” the CJI remarked.

According to the petitioner, the State's own figures demonstrated a substantial shortfall. “Minimum 50,000 students have to be admitted because it's 25% of the total students admitted in one year in the private schools. As per government figures almost 2 lakh students are admitted at the entry level every year,” he submitted. The petitioner further described the issue as a continuing grievance that had persisted for years.

The Court then sought clarification regarding the statutory mechanism under which private schools are compensated for admitting EWS students. “What is the government policy? Do they compensate the schools?” the CJI asked.

The petitioner replied that the reimbursement mechanism was expressly provided under the Act. “It is written in the Act that the amount of fee fixed by the government shall be paid to them.”

At this stage, the Bench remarked: “We hope you are not fighting for these private schools that they want to be paid by the government.”

The petitioner responded by informing the Court that he had been involved in the formulation of the legislation itself. “In 2009 I was Joint Secretary in Government of India and was involved in drafting the Act itself. I have no interest in private sector.”

Recognising the petitioner's long engagement with the issue, the CJI suggested a more focused approach. “You must be having at least some channels because you are actively working on this. Do at least one district survey, don't do it for Jalandhar or Ludhiana, do for some comparatively backward area. Find out how many schools are there and how many of them have refused to implement or have not granted admission.”

The petitioner informed the Court that he had already sought information through the Right to Information Act. “I put an RTI year back to all the districts asking how many students have been admitted. They said they have not admitted anyone in the last 15 years. Government of India can now step in.”

“This is the problem with RTI. They will respond, they will reply to the nature of question you will formulate. Those who will be replying there also sometimes very intelligently they will behave," the CJI said.

The Court then suggested a set of specific questions that could yield more reliable data. “You have to ask how many private schools are recognised in this district, are these recognised by CBSE or by State, how many total seats are sanctioned, how many students, and how many are from EWS or marginalized sections," the Court said.

The CJI added: “The moment you ask these five questions you'll have an exact answer.”

The petitioner stated that RTI remained his only practical tool for obtaining information. “I only have RTI as a channel otherwise I will not have any information.”

Concluding the hearing, the Court issued notice in the matter and directed the petitioner to gather the suggested data. “We are issuing notice. Meanwhile, just do this. That will help us in understanding the issue,” the CJI observed.

The matter has now been listed for hearing on August 17.