The Supreme Court has raised serious questions on the 2014 decision related to the exemption of the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009 for minority schools. This verdict was given by the Supreme Court in the Pramati case. On Monday (September 1, 2025), the court sent it to Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai (CJI Br Gavai), asking him to reconsider the decision of the case. The court has raised doubts about the justification for keeping these schools out of the RTE Act.
Under the RTE Act 2009, there is a provision for free education for children between six and 14 years. It says that all private schools will have to reserve 25 percent seats for weak and disadvantaged children, but in 2014, the Supreme Court had exempted minority schools from RTE law. The court has raised the question whether the decision to exemption these schools from this provision is correct or it needs to be considered again.
The bench of Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Manmohan cited the material presented on the records including the study of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPR) expressed disappointment that the decision to keep these schools separated from the scope of the law prepared fertile land for misuse.
According to the PTI report, the court said that we want to say with great humility that the decision taken in the Educational and Cultural Trust case inadvertently threatened the foundation of universal primary education. The court further said that exemption from the Right to Education Act to minority institutions affects the concept of equal school education and the idea of inclusiveness and universality included in Article 21A is weak.
Article 21A of the Constitution is related to the right to education and says, ‘The government will provide free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of 6 to 14 years.’ The Supreme Court said that the Right to Education Act ensures many facilities like infrastructure, trained teachers, books, dress and midday meal to children. However, minority schools kept outside the purview of the Right to Education Act are not obliged to provide these facilities.
The Supreme Court said, ‘Some minority schools provide some facilities mandatory under the Right to Education Act, but some other schools are unable to do so that their students do not get access to such compulsory facilities. For many of these students, such benefits are not just facilities, but equality and recognition confirmation.
The court said, “Minority institutions work without similar guidelines, which makes children and their parents uncertain what and how they are taught, and often they are cut off from the national structure of universal education.” The Supreme Court said that rather than united children beyond caste, class, creed and community, this situation divides and weakens the transforming capacity of shared teaching sites.
The bench said, ‘If the goal is to build a uniform and united society, then such a discount takes us in the opposite direction. This initiative, which was initiated as an attempt to protect cultural and religious freedom, has unknowingly created a regulatory flaw, resulting in an increase in institutions seeking minority status to bypass the system determined by the Right to Education Act.