Indian constitution making Education a fundamental Right

1) History

[EUDCATION PLAYS an important role in the development of a nation and development of an individual. Quality primary education is regarded as the foundation of nation building. Therefore, a free and compulsory education for the children of 6-14 year age group provision was added in article 45 of directive principles of state policy of our constitution.

This was intended to be implemented within 10 years of the commencement of constitution. However, it could not be possible, due to certain reasons. Education had been added in concurrent list through the 42nd constitution amendment act, now implementation of education policies became the joint responsibility of centre and states.

National education policy of 1986 was mainly focused on children of age group of 6-14 years. The sarvashiksha abhiyaan was aimed to educate all the children of 6-14 year group until the year 2010. Through the 86th constitutional amendment act (2002), a new section added in article 21(a), according to which education became a fundamental right for the children of 6-14 years age group.

A)) DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

ARTICLE 41 Article 41. Right to work, to education and to public assistance in certain cases.—The State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective provision for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want.

ARTICLE 45: : "The State shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years."

B) FUNDAMENTAL DUTY ARTICLE 51A

Article 51A of the Constitution was amended and a new clause (k) was added after clause (j), namely, "(k) who is a parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child or, as the case may be, ward between the age of six and fourteen years."

C) JUDJEMENTS:

1) Miss Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1992 SC 2100)

Court held the fee to be an arbitrary and unequal action in violation of Article 21, and stated; ‘We think that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, namely the bare necessaries of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing and expressing oneself.’ Note that the limiting clause in Article 21 is not applicable because the capitation fee was not established by law, rather by the policy of a medical school.

2) Unni Krishnan v State of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1993 SC 2178)

An important extract from the Supreme Court Judgement in the landmark case Unni Krishnan, J. P. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1993, S.C. 2179-2254) "1. The citizens of this country have a fundamental right to education. The said right flows from Article 21. This right is, however, not an absolute right. Its content and parameters have to be determined in the light of Articles 45 and 41. In other words, every child/citizen of this country has a right to free education until he completes the age of fourteen years. Thereafter his right to education is subject to the limit of economic capacity and development of the State. 2)

2)INTRODUCTION :

The present Act has its history in the drafting of the Indian constitution at the time of Independence but are more specifically to the Constitutional Amendment that included the Article 21A in the Indian constitution making Education a fundamental Right. This amendment, however, specified the need for a legislation to describe the mode of implementation of the same which necessitated the drafting of a separate Education Bill. The rough draft of the bill was composed in year 2005. It received much opposition due to its mandatory provision to provide 25% reservation for disadvantaged children in private schools. The sub-committee of the Central Advisory Board of Education which prepared the draft Bill held this provision as a significant prerequisite for creating a democratic and egalitarian society. Indian Law commission had initially proposed 50% reservation for disadvantaged students in private schools.

A)The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act or Right to Education Act (RTE),

which was passed by the Indian parliament on 4 August 2009, describes the modalities of the provision of free and compulsory education for children between 6 and 14 in India under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution.^] India became one of 135 countries to make education a fundamental right of every child when the act came into force on 1 April 2010.

B) Passage

The bill was approved by the cabinet on 2 July 2009. Rajya Sabha passed the bill on 20 July 2009 and the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2009. It received Presidential assent and was notified as law on 3 Sept 2009 as The Children's Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act. The law came into effect in the whole of India except the state of Jammu and Kashmir from 1 April 2010, the first time in the history of India a law was brought into force by a speech by the Prime Minister. In his speech, Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India stated that, "We are committed to ensuring that all children, irrespective of gender and social category, have access to education. An education that enables them to acquire the skills, knowledge, values and attitudes necessary to become responsible and active citizens of India."

C)MAIN FEATURES:

The Act makes education a fundamental right of every child between the ages of 6 and 14 and specifies minimum norms in elementary schools. It requires all private schools to reserve 25% of seats to children from poor families (to be reimbursed by the state as part of the public-private partnership plan). It also prohibits all unrecognized schools from practice, and makes provisions for no donation or capitation fees and no interview of the child or parent for admission. The Act also provides that no child shall be held back, expelled, or required to pass a board examination until the completion of elementary education. There is also a provision for special training of school drop-outs to bring them up to par with students of the same age.

The Right to Education of persons with disabilities until 18 years of age has also been made a fundamental right. A number of other provisions regarding improvement of school infrastructure, teacher-student ratio and faculty are made in the Act.

The Act provides for a special organization, the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights, an autonomous body set up in 2007, to monitor the implementation of the act, together with Commissions to be set up by the states.

3) Criticism

1)The act has been criticized for being hastily-drafted, not consulting many groups active in education, not considering the quality of education, infringing on the rights of private and religious minority schools to administer their system, and for excluding children under six years of age. Many of the ideas are seen as continuing the policies of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan of the last decade, and the World Bank funded District Primary Education Programme DPEP of the '90s, both of which, while having set up a number of schools in rural areas, have been criticized for being ineffective and corruption-ridden.

2)The quality of education provided by the government system remains in question. While it remains the largest provider of elementary education in the country forming 80% of all recognized schools, it suffers from shortages of teachers, infrastructural gaps and several habitations continue to lack schools altogether. There are also frequent allegations of government schools being riddled with absenteeism and mismanagement and appointments are based on political convenience. Despite the allure of free lunch-food in the government schools, many parents send their children to private schools. Average schoolteacher salaries in private rural schools in some States (about Rs. 4,000 per month) are considerably lower than that in government schools. As a result, proponents of low cost private schools, critiqued government schools as being poor value for money.

Children attending the private schools are seen to be at an advantage, thus discriminating against the weakest sections, who are forced to go to government schools. Furthermore, the system has been criticized as catering to the rural elites who are able to afford school fees in a country where large number of families live in absolute poverty. The act has been criticized as discriminatory for not addressing these issues. Well-known educationists

--

Haider Ajaz