SC pulls up NCPCR over ‘indifference’ to 25% quota for weaker-section children in private schools

The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) over what it described as an “indifferent” approach towards implementing the mandatory 25 per cent admission quota for children from weaker and disadvantaged sections in private schools.

A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe said the statutory child rights body had an important responsibility in ensuring that the provision under Section 12(1)(c) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, was effectively implemented across the country.

Court questions NCPCR

“NCPCR being a statutory authority has a big role to play. Whoever heads the NCPCR must be sensitised about how much hope and trust is placed on its shoulders. How can they act so indifferent?” the bench observed.

The court directed the NCPCR chairperson to remain present at the next hearing. It clarified that the direction was not part of contempt proceedings and said it wanted to underline the magnitude of the responsibility entrusted to the commission.

Under Section 12(1)(c) of the RTE Act, specified private schools are required to admit children belonging to weaker and disadvantaged groups from the neighbourhood to the extent of at least 25 per cent of the strength of the entry-level class.

January order

The court was reviewing compliance with its January 13 judgment directing strict enforcement of the provision. In that ruling, it had noted that although the NCPCR had formulated a standard operating procedure, the guidelines were not legally enforceable.

The Supreme Court had asked the NCPCR and the Centre to consider framing subordinate legislation through appropriate rules and regulations laying down the method and manner in which children from weaker and disadvantaged sections should be admitted to neighbourhood schools.

The court had warned that without enforceable rules and regulations, the constitutional objective of Article 21A, which guarantees free and compulsory education, and the statutory policy contained in Section 12(1)(c) could become ineffective.

Nine yet to respond

During Tuesday’s hearing, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre and NCPCR, placed before the court a short compliance affidavit filed by NCPCR Director V Ramanadha Reddy.

The affidavit said the commission had written to Principal Secretaries or Secretaries of School Education in all states and Union Territories seeking information about the rules and regulations governing implementation of the 25 per cent admission provision.

According to the response, nine states and Union Territories were yet to provide the information sought, while the remaining jurisdictions had taken steps towards implementing the provision.

‘Make it a reality’

The bench, however, was not satisfied with an approach largely confined to seeking responses from states and Union Territories.

“NCPCR is a regulatory body under the RTE Act. It is for them to make the purpose and object of the statute contemplated under Section 12 of the Act a reality,” the court observed.

The bench said the commission had to ensure that the requirement was implemented by every neighbourhood school covered by the law rather than merely collect information about steps taken by individual governments.

The matter will be considered further at the next hearing, when the NCPCR chairperson has been asked to appear before the court.