#RTE Act

The court quashed cancellation of a Scheduled Caste child's RTE admission, holding distance norms cannot be rigidly enforced where a Division Bench ordered their removal for unaided schools and compliance would cost the child an academic year. The ruling affirms procedural barriers cannot override substantive educational access for disadvantaged groups.

Tripura High Court ruled that an 18-month Diploma in Elementary Education completed through NIOS satisfies the eligibility criteria for the Tripura Teacher Eligibility Test 2024, ordering the issuance of the certificate and the petitioner’s consideration for appointment. The decision overrides the prospectus’s two-year diploma requirement, widening eligibility for ODL candidates in future TET recruitments.

Bombay High Court rules that a child's admission under the Right to Education Act cannot be denied solely for lack of father's caste certificate when mother's valid certificate exists and father is deceased. The judgment clarifies procedural requirements for single-parent admissions under the RTE Act, benefiting marginalized communities including nomadic tribes.

Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench restored a student's RTE Act 25% quota admission after verifying the petitioner's address, setting aside cancellation due to an address verification error by authorities. The ruling underscores the need for accurate verification before revoking admission rights under the Right to Education framework.

The Bombay High Court has imposed a strict 12-week timeline for state reimbursement to private schools under RTE Section 12(2), requiring recommendations within two weeks, eligibility determination within eight weeks, and disbursement within two weeks thereafter. This enforces a binding procedural framework to prevent chronic delays in statutory payments, directly impacting hundreds of unaided schools across Maharashtra.

The Bombay High Court has mandated that the Zilla Parishad decide pending reimbursement claims from RTE-compliant schools within three weeks, affirming that delayed payments violate the state’s constitutional duty to fund statutory educational obligations. This ruling directly impacts hundreds of private schools financially strained by unreimbursed costs for admitting EWS students, reinforcing that compliance cannot be penalized by administrative inertia.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that a registered leave-and-license agreement is not mandatory to prove residence under the Right to Education Act; an unregistered agreement, coupled with long-term occupancy and supporting documents, satisfies the 1-km radius requirement for Scheduled Caste admissions. This clarifies a critical barrier for low-income families and reinforces substantive rights over procedural formalities in access to education.

The Bombay HC has ruled that demanding registered leave-and-license agreements for school admissions under the RTE Act violates the fundamental right to education under Article 21A. This sets a critical precedent that administrative hurdles tied to residential documentation cannot override statutory and constitutional guarantees for neighbourhood children aged 6-14, especially in tenanted housing.

Supreme Court affirms that education in a child's mother tongue is a constitutional right under Article 350A, RTE Act, and NEP 2020, directing Rajasthan to include Rajasthani in teacher recruitment exams and school curriculum. The ruling sets a precedent for linguistic rights in education, impacting state policies nationwide.

The Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to protect the rights of candidates in select panels under the terminated Rehbar-e-Taleem (ReT) scheme, mandating their appointment within eight weeks provided they qualify the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) within three years. This ruling balances equitable relief under Article 21A with regulatory compliance, setting a precedent for post-scheme employment disputes.

The Supreme Court has ruled that neighbourhood schools under the RTE Act must admit children immediately upon state allocation, with no authority to re-verify eligibility or impose procedural delays. This upholds Section 12(1)(c) as a non-negotiable statutory right, ensuring social integration and eliminating institutional gatekeeping that undermines Article 21A.

The Karnataka High Court ruled that children above the RTE Act’s age limit of 14 can be admitted to Class 9 if they do not claim RTE entitlements, provided the school offers a re-examination opportunity under CBSE norms. This creates a critical pathway for older students to access formal education without triggering statutory obligations, balancing administrative flexibility with the right to education.

Bombay High Court ruled that minority educational institutions are not bound by TET qualification requirements under the RTE Act until the Supreme Court delivers its final verdict. The court conditionally approved an assistant teacher's appointment, emphasizing the interim exemption applies to all minority schools.

Allahabad HC strikes down UP TGT Service Rules for omitting TET qualification, reinforcing NCTE’s 2010 notification under the RTE Act as binding. The state must amend its recruitment rules within eight weeks, impacting teacher eligibility across 904 institutions.

Bombay HC mandates the State to determine RTE Act reimbursement eligibility and release arrears of ₹16.8 lakh within 12 weeks, failing which a reasoned order must be passed. The ruling reinforces statutory compliance timelines for private schools under the RTE framework, ensuring procedural fairness in government disbursements.