Padmini Baruah
Education,
described as a basic human right under the Universal declaration of Human
Rights, has, in recent times, become an important part of national policy. As
the problems of development can, in the long term, only be tackled effectively
by building up the human capital of a nation, it is imperative that every
citizen of the country receive adequate free and universal education. It is with
this broad objective in mind that the Constitution (86th Amendment) Act was passed in 2002,
declaring free and compulsory Education as a fundamental right under Art. 21A.
In furtherance of the object of Art. 21A, the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 was enacted by Parliament as an enabling legislation. In a recent judgement, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of
this Act, and held that this act would apply to government schools, aided
schools inclusive of aided minority schools, schools belonging to specified
category, and unaided non-minority schools. However, the judgement excluded
from its ambit unaided minority schools.
In
keeping with its role in spreading awareness on current issues among the legal
student community, the Law and Society Committee, NLSIU organised a talk on the issues arising out this
judgement in association with the Centre for Child and the Law, NLSIU. This talk was led by Niranjanaradhya V.P. (Fellow and Programme
Head, Universalisation of School Education at CCL) and Jayna Kothari (a partner
in Ashira Law, Bangalore, who has worked on this case on behalf of the Azim
Premji Foundation.)
This
discussion brought to light several relevant issues pertaining to the
substantive provisions of the Act as well as the prospective challenges of
implementation. The prime cause of concern raised was that the Act, as it
stands at present, completely excludes unaided minority schools from its
purview. This gives rise to the potential problem of private schools claiming
minority status on arbitrary grounds to escape their obligations under this
Act. Numerous insights were offered on this issue by the guest speakers as well
as the faculty members present, who clarified the position of the law in this
regard. Accordingly, Article 29 and 30 of the Indian Constitution give
substantial protection to the rights of the minority institutions, and any
intervention in their administration would imply violation of fundamental
rights.
Another
problem may be envisaged at the level of implementation, without challenges of
corruption, evasion of responsibilities, and discrimination. While
acknowledging that there are yet no institutional mechanisms in place for
effective implementation, it was agreed upon that the State as well as
non-State actors had a significant role to play in this regard.
All
in all, the discussion successfully encapsulated the challenges that the
implementation of the Right to Education Act continues to present. It was a
highly educational experience which succeeded in sensitising and arousing the
interest of all those present. It is hoped that this issue is actively taken up
by the students of an institution with such social obligations as NLSIU so that
a constructive way forward may be forged.
***
The author is a I Year, B.A.LL.B (Hons.) student at NLSIU.
The Committee is pleased to announce that it is coordinating a research project with the Centre for Law and Policy Research and CCL to bring out a dossier on the Act.
