NewKerala.com

Key Points

The Supreme Court will hear a crucial public interest litigation challenging the exclusion of minority institutions from Teacher Eligibility Test requirements. The petition argues that current RTE Act provisions violate constitutional principles of equality and education rights. Petitioner Nitin Upadhyay contends that minority school exemptions perpetuate systemic discrimination. The case could potentially reshape educational standards across India's diverse school landscape.

Key Points: SC to Hear PIL on TET Mandatory in Minority Schools

  • Supreme Court to examine TET mandatory requirements for minority institutions
  • Petition challenges RTE Act sections as discriminatory
  • PIL seeks uniform education standards across school systems
  • Argues for equal educational quality for all children
2 min read

SC to hear tomorrow PIL to make TET mandatory in minority institutions

Supreme Court considers landmark petition challenging RTE Act's minority school exemptions and teacher eligibility test requirements

"Article 30 aims to establish equality between all citizens - Nitin Upadhyay, Petitioner"

New Delhi, Oct 14

The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Wednesday a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to make the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) mandatory for all schools imparting education to children aged 6–14 years, including minority institutions.

The plea argued that the exclusion of minority-managed institutions from the purview of the RTE Act violates the fundamental rights to equality and education enshrined in Articles 14, 15, 16, 21, and 21A of the Constitution.

As per the causelist published on the website of the apex court, a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih will take up the matter for hearing on October 14.

The petition challenged Sections 1(4) and 1(5) of the Right to Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), calling them "arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional".

"The Right to Education guaranteed under Article 21A implies equal quality education. Therefore, exclusion of certain schools from TET is against the golden goals of the Constitution," the PIL contended.

The petitioner, Nitin Upadhyay, who is pursuing law at Delhi University, argued that Article 30, which protects the rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions, must be interpreted "purposively, not literally".

"Article 30 aims to establish equality between all citizens and place the minorities on an equal footing," the petition said, referring to the Supreme Court's recent judgment, where the apex court had questioned whether exempting minority schools from the RTE Act perpetuates systemic exclusion.

Citing the Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust vs. State of Maharashtra case, the PIL said that a 2021 study by the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) found that only 8.76 per cent of students in minority schools came from socially and economically disadvantaged groups.

Praying for a "common education system", the PIL said that applying the TET uniformly would enhance educational quality and promote national interest.

"A common minimum education programme for children up to 14 years would achieve the code of common culture, removal of disparity, and the depletion of discriminatory values," the petition contended.

The PIL seeks a declaration that Sections 1(4) and 1(5) are void and inoperative for violating equality and education rights, and the schools providing both religious and secular education are covered under the provisions of the RTE Act.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rohit P
While I support quality education for all, we must be careful not to dilute the constitutional protection given to minority institutions. There should be a balanced approach that respects both quality standards and minority rights.
A
Ananya R
The NCPCR data showing only 8.76% students from disadvantaged groups in minority schools is alarming! This clearly indicates exclusion. TET should be mandatory for all schools - no exceptions! 🇮🇳
M
Michael C
As someone who studied in both minority and regular schools, I can say the quality difference is noticeable. All children deserve equally qualified teachers regardless of which school they attend.
S
Siddharth J
Good initiative by the law student! Article 30 was meant to protect minority rights, not create educational inequality. The Supreme Court should ensure that quality standards apply uniformly across the board.
K
Kavya N
While the intention is good, I worry about practical implementation. Many minority schools serve remote areas where qualified TET teachers are hard to find. The government should provide support systems first.
V
Vikram M
Finally! This exemption was creating two classes of education in our country. Every Indian child deserves the same quality education. Hope SC takes the right decision for our nation's future. 🙏

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50