Under s.12 (1) (c) of the landmark Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education (aka RTE) Act, 2009 — having perhaps given up hope of ever improving learning outcomes in the country’s 1.20 million government schools — the then ruling Congress-led UPA-II government at the Centre expropriated 25 percent of capacity in private elementary (classes I-VIII) schools for poor children in their neighbourhoods. A proviso embedded in s.12 (1)(c) also obliged elementary schools dispensing pre-primary education to reserve 25 percent of capacity in preschool for poor neighborhood children. However, to partly compensate private unaided (financially independent) primary-secondaries the cost of providing free of charge education to poor neighborhood children, s .12 (2) of the RTE Act requires the State (state or local governments) to reimburse them tuition fees equivalent to the per pupil cost incurred in their own government primary schools or actual fees of private schools, if lower. Inevitably, the constitutional validity of s.12 (1) (c) was challenged by private school associations. In Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan & Ors vs. Union of India (2012), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of s.12 (1) (c) by a 2-1 majority while exempting minority and boarding schools. However, despite the normative tuition fees of private unaided schools being substantially higher than the cost of per capita education incurred by the State for children in public education, state/local governments have been reluctant and/or tardy in reimbursing private schools the modest sums owing to them for complying with s.12 (1) (c). Private budget schools in Maharashtra claim that a massive sum of Rs.450 crore is owing to them since 2012-13 under s.12 (2) of the RTE Act. However, the state’s education ministry challenges this amount and pegs it at a mere Rs.147.61 crore (2012-16). This dispute has prompted the Maharashtra English School Trustees Association (MESTA) and the Independent English Schools Association (IESA), which together represent 14,000 private budget (i.e, low cost) schools across the state, to issue a notice of stoppage of s.12 (1) (c) admissions from the academic year 2018-19 unless pending dues are cleared. According to MESTA and IESA spokespersons, the huge mismatch in reimbursement calculations is due to a large number of schools demanding reimbursement of fees for children admitted into their pre-primary classes. However, despite the clear directive of the proviso which directs composite schools to reserve 25 percent of capacity in preschools pari passu with class I, the Maharashtra government disputes reimbursement of costs incurred towards poor children admitted in pre-primary classes on the narrow legal argument that the RTE Act is applicable only to children aged 6-14, and not younger children. When a division bench of the Bombay high court (April 28, 2015) directed the state government to reimburse composite schools under s.12 (2) stating “the appropriate governments (i.e, the State) cannot shirk their responsibilities by contending that they are under no obligation towards pre-primary education,” the BJP-Shiv Sena coalition state government issued a government resolution dated 30 April, 2015, “cancelling” all pre-primary admissions…
Maharashtra: Grudging reimbursement
EducationWorld May 17 | EducationWorld