New Delhi, Sep 1 (UNI) The Supreme Court today expressed serious doubt over the correctness of its 2014 ruling in Pramati Educational & Cultural Trust, which had exempted minority schools, both aided and unaided, from the purview of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act).
A Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih, while pronouncing judgment in a batch of civil appeals relating to teacher eligibility and promotions, observed, “In view of the foregoing discussions, we respectfully express our doubt as to whether Pramati, insofar as it exempts minority schools from application of the RTE Act, whether aided or unaided, has been correctly decided.”
The Bench questioned whether the earlier judgment had failed to consider a narrower interpretation of Section 12(1)(c) of the RTE Act, which requires schools to reserve 25% seats for children from weaker sections.
The Court asked whether, in the case of minority institutions, this mandate could have been read down to apply specifically to children from weaker sections of the same minority community, rather than exempting minority schools altogether. The court suggested reading down of Section 12 (1)(c)
Noting the gravity of the constitutional questions involved, the Bench referred four issues to Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai for appropriate directions on the question, whether the Pramati judgment requires reconsideration.
Firstly, the court sought to know whether Section 12(1)(c) of the RTE Act infringes Article 30 on rights of minorities, and if so, whether it could be saved by being read down to apply only to weaker sections within the minority community.
It also referred to the effect of non-consideration of Section 23(2) of the RTE Act, and questioned whether the entire enactment could have been declared unconstitutional on grounds beyond Section 12(1)(c).
The Court clarified that while it could have directly referred the issue to a larger Bench, as was done in the Aligarh Muslim University case, it had chosen instead to leave the matter to the discretion of the CJI, citing precedent from Shri Bhagwan & Anr vs Ram Chand & Anr (1965).
Alongside the RTE-minority question, the Bench also dealt with issues concerning the Teachers’ Eligibility Test (TET), made mandatory by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) on July 29, 2011.
The Court directed that under Article 142, teachers with less than five years of service remaining will be allowed to continue until retirement without qualifying TET.
Such teachers will, however, be ineligible for promotion unless they pass TET.
In-service teachers recruited before July 29, 2011, with more than five years of service left, must qualify for TET within two years to continue in service.
Failure to qualify will result in compulsory retirement, with entitlement to terminal benefits provided they meet qualifying service requirements.
The Pramati ruling (2014) had extended constitutional protection to minority institutions against RTE obligations, holding that any imposition of Section 12(1)(c) would infringe upon the minority community’s right to establish and administer institutions of their choice under Article 30.
Monday’s judgment is the first time a Supreme Court Bench has openly questioned the correctness of that precedent.
The matter will now be placed before the Chief Justice of India for directions on whether a larger Bench should be constituted to reconsider Pramati.
