Education Exemption for Minority Schools

04.09.2025

Education Exemption for Minority Schools

Context
The Supreme Court is reconsidering the 2014 Pramati judgment, which exempted minority schools from RTE provisions, highlighting the tension between minority autonomy and children’s right to inclusive, equitable education.

Background

• Right to Education Act (2009): Operationalizes Article 21A, ensuring free and compulsory education for children aged 6–14.
   
• Government schools: Free education for all children.
   
• Aided schools: Must provide free seats proportional to government aid.
   
• Private unaided schools: Required to reserve 25% of entry-level seats for disadvantaged children (Section 12(1)(c)).
   
• Sets norms for pupil-teacher ratios, infrastructure, teacher eligibility, and prohibits corporal punishment and capitation fees.
   
• Designed to promote equality, social justice, and inclusive classrooms.
   
• 2014 Pramati Judgment: Constitution Bench exempted minority institutions from RTE provisions, citing Article 30(1). This granted aided and unaided minority schools complete immunity, weakening the inclusion mandate of RTE.
   

Challenges from the Exemption

1. Misuse of minority status by private schools to bypass RTE rules
    

• Example: Several unaided private schools in Maharashtra and Karnataka obtained minority status primarily to avoid reserving 25% of seats for disadvantaged children, limiting inclusivity.
   

1. Reduced access for disadvantaged children to quality education
    

• Example: In cities like Bengaluru and Pune, economically weaker students struggle to gain admission to reputed minority-run schools, despite RTE mandates, restricting access to better resources.
   

1. Regulatory loopholes undermining Article 21A’s universal character
    

• Example: Schools claiming minority status often escape inspections and enforcement of RTE norms, as seen in some Delhi and Hyderabad schools, weakening the right to free and compulsory education.
   

About Supreme Court recent observations

• A two-judge bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta noted that Pramati “went too far” in granting blanket immunity.
   
• Emphasized that Articles 21A and 30 must coexist, and children’s rights cannot be compromised.
   
• Suggested a case-by-case approach for the 25% quota in minority schools.
   
• Warned that blanket exemptions erode inclusivity and weaken RTE’s intent.
   

Way Forward

• Judicial Rebalancing: Larger bench to harmonize Articles 21A and 30; clarify that autonomy does not mean  exemption.
   
• Policy Measures: Ensure minimum teacher qualifications and infrastructure norms across all institutions; adapt quotas to prioritize disadvantaged children.
   
• Strengthen Public Education: Invest in quality government schools to reduce over-reliance on minority/private institutions.
   
• Promote Diversity: Encourage socio-economic mixing, democratic classroom culture, and public awareness campaigns.
   

Conclusion
Exemption of minority schools from RTE is a critical test of India’s constitutional morality. Ensuring inclusive, equitable education must take precedence over institutional privileges. The Supreme Court has an opportunity to reaffirm that education is a universal right, harmonizing minority autonomy with the child’s right to learn.