The RTE Act 2009 and the RTI Act 2005 (Its impact

Transcription

The RTE Act 2009 and the RTI Act 2005 (Its impact
Reality check
The RTE Act 2009 and the RTI Act 2005
Its impact on Minority Educational Institutions
Following harassment of minority educational institutions by the authorities in
Dhanbad district of Jharkhand, Fr. Gerald Ravi D’Souza, SJ, of De Nobili School
throws light on RTE Act and its impact on minority institutions
T
he time has come to clear our doubts and
know the applicability of the RTE Act
2009 and the RTI Act 2005 for minority
institutions. Often people are misguided without
making efforts to know which institution is
minority and non-minority. An institution is not
granted minority status just based upon the 50% or
more enrollments of minority students. It is purely
granted based on the two essential conditions i.e.
who established the institution and whether it is
maintained by a person or group of persons from
amongst the minorities. A “Minority Educational
Institution” means an institution established and
administered by the minorities under clause (1) of
article 30 of the Constitution and so declared by an
Act of Parliament or by the Central Government
or declared as a minority educational institution
under the National Commission for Minority
Educational Institutions Act, 2004.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court after marathon
hearings and prolonged deliberations has
pronounced its judgment on April 12, 2012. The
minority judgment delivered by one of the three
0202
INDIAN CURRENTS
06 - 19 April 2015
judges held that the provisions of the Right of
Children to Free and Compulsory Education
under RTE Act 2009 can be enforced against the
schools u/s 2(n) of the said Act except Unaided
Minority Schools not receiving any kind of aid or
grants to meet their expenses from the Appropriate
Government or Local Authorities. This decision of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated April 12, 2012,
is well known to the Education Departments since
three writ petitions were collectively taken up for
hearing by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India along
with Hon’ble Justice Mr. K.S. Radhakrishnan and
decided in which the Education Departments also
represented. However, they seem to be novices to
these and trying to enforce them on institutions
which are exempted by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court.
Aggrieved by this majority view judgment, the
aided minority institutions challenged it with
writ petition (C) No 416 of 2012. Delivering the
landmark judgment, the Constitutional Bench
of the Supreme Court upholding the petitioner’s
point, it concluded that as minority institutions
(aided/unaided), the provisions of the Right of
Reality check
O
Jharkhand Christian Schools Targeted
fficials of Christian schools in
Jharkhand’s Dhanbad say district
officials accused them for faulting rules
of Right to Education (RTE) Act, and threatened
action without considering their rights as
minority institutions.
As many as 48 principals from higher
secondary schools in the district, including
catholic schools, were summoned on March 25 to
the meeting at the deputy commissioner’s office
by Dhanbad superintendent of education (DSE)
Bankey Behari.
But representative of De Nobili group of
schools Father Gerald D’Souza and Margaret
Mary principal of Carmel School in Dhanbad
alleged the officials singled them out and
targeted them, accusing them of faulting in the
implementation of the RTE.
“The DSE asked me to leave the hall as I am not
a principal but a representative of the eight De
Nobili schools. I was called rule flouter by Manoj
Mishra, secretary of Jharkhand Abhibhavak
Manch,” D’Souza said.
Dhanbad’s additional collector B.P.L. Das
chaired the meeting that was attended by Behari
and members of Jharkhand Abhibhavak Manch.
Das asked all schools to abide by the RTE Act
and submit action-taken reports furnishing all
information by March 31. He gave schools time
to implement all rules till April 15 and warned of
action in case of any complaint.
Sister Margaret Mary said the Supreme Court
has allowed certain privileges to Christian
minority schools in implementing the RTE,
which aims to help government to provide free
education to children. “We (Christian minority
institutions) cannot be forced to abide by rules
blindly,” she said.
Refuting the allegations, additional collector
Das said: “No one was insulted. We only asked
all the schools to adhere to the RTE Act,” the
Telegraph reported. (UCAN)
Children to Free and Compulsory Education are not applicable to
them vide judgment in Pramati Education and Cultural Trust Versus
Union of India [vide (2014) 8 SCC page 1 (269-271)].
When we closely look at the applicability of the RTE and RTI Acts,
there is a big difference between these two, more particularly the
implementation of the provisions of the RTE Act in private aided and
unaided minority schools at the behest of the judgment of the SC on
12.04.2012. There is also a big difference between the institute on aid
(one time if we say the land and building) and aided institute.
An unaided minority school does not come under the RTE Act or a
public authority under RTI Act. Aid means and is recurring in nature
and public authority means which is established by the enactment
of parliament or assembly and /or its day to day administration is
monitored and interfered with by the state as defined under article 12
of the constitution. Almost all private schools are under the assistance
of the respective state Govt. in our country which includes onetime
support of giving land and building and in some cases the MLA and
MP lad fund also supports schools. This is not the aid and definitively
not an aided school. To become a public authority, an institution has to
An unaided minority
school does not come
under the RTE Act
or a public authority
under RTI Act
be an aided by the government
and has to be established by
the enactment of parliament or
assembly.
This fact is well laid down
by the Hon’ble Bombay High
Court in writ petition number
INDIAN CURRENTS
06 - 19 April 2015
21
Reality check
Those who are forcing the unaided
minority institutions to implement
the RTE Act, contrary to the Supreme
Court’s verdict, are in all probability
violating the apex court’s judgment
5576 of 2013 with CA No. 1885
of 2013 in The Society of St.
Mary’s School & Another Vs. The
Pune Zilla Parishad & Others.
Arguing the case in favour of the
petitioners, the two bench court
held that a school becomes aided
school provided it receives aid or
grants in terms of money to meet
whole or part of its expenses.
Obviously, for running a school,
there is recurring expenditure
on the payment of salaries and
allowances to the teaching and
non-teaching staff, maintenance
of the school building and
purchase of articles such as
stationary etc required for
day-to-day functioning of the
school. If any amount is received
by a school either from any
Appropriate Government or a
Local Authority to meet whole
or a part of such expenditure, a
school can be treated as an aided
school.
One time aid to a school for
infrastructure etc. to run with
private management without
any recurring aid from and
without interference by the
Govt. into its administration and
day to day affairs does not mean
a public authority u/s 2(h) of the
RTI Act. Mere representation
of a member of the Govt. in the
managing committee or advisory
body of the school cannot change
its nature, character and status
from private to Govt. nor can
convert the school an aided one
2222
INDIAN CURRENTS
nor can entitle our school to
claim and get aid therefore.
There is a lack of desire to know
from the part of the authorities
concerned in the department
Those who are forcing
minority institutions
to implement the
RTE Act are in all
probability violating
the SC judgment
in 2012
of education to learn the
amendment made in the RTE Act
2009 on June 19, 2012. However,
there is also a deep ignorance
and arrogance reflected by
their statements and comments
towards the implementation
of the judgment of the SC in its
right spirit. The recent press
statements of Mr. Banke Bihari
Singh (DSE), Dhanbad District
RTE & RTI nodal officer, clearly
sends out signals of harassment
and torture that is meted out to
the minority community school
06 - 19 April 2015
authorities. The officers of such
rank cannot blindly ignore the
facts and figures, notifications
and judgments before issuing
press notices and letters to the
institutions. Those who are
forcing these institutions to
implement the RTE Act, contrary
to the SC’s verdict, they are in all
probability violating the Hon’ble
SC judgment.
Just because any officer in
the
Education
Department
on the face of the allegations
of some miscreants for non
implementation of the RTE Act,
cannot enforce to implement
some provisions thereof, without
verifying the correct position of
law. It is found that in Dhanbad
District of Jharkhand State, the
Nodal officer of RTE Act 2009,
Mr. Banke Bihari Singh (DSE),
seems to tarnish the image of the
prestigious schools by issuing
letters to the press, its authorities
and community which is not
expected from a govt. official
of his stature. The minority
institutions need no exception
nor pitied by anybody except
implementation of the judgment
of the SC in its right spirit. Those
who are forcing these minority
institutions to implement the
RTE & RTI Acts, contrary to
the SC’s verdict, to ensure that
none is transgressing any law or
committing any contempt of the
court.