Scheme For Reserving 25% Seats Under RTE Cannot Be Used Multiple Times For Admission Of Same Child: Bombay High Court
The scheme for reserving 25 per cent seats for the underprivileged under the Right To Education (RTE) Act is designed to distribute educational opportunities among as many eligible children but the said scheme does not confer a right on a parent to seek allocation of a seat multiple times for the same child, held the Bombay High Court recently.
A division bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten Venegavkar dismissed the petition filed by a father, who 'insisted' for allocation of seat for his child in a school near his residence, despite having already availed the benefit of the scheme and admitting the child to another school, which was a bit away from his residence.
The judges noted that the provision (for reserving 25 per cent seats) is intended to ensure equitable access to education for children who would otherwise be unable to afford education in private institutions. It noted that under this provision, a 'structured' admission process including lottery selection is used to allocate seats to children.
"If the interpretation suggested by the petitioner were to be accepted, it would permit a parent to repeatedly apply under the RTE scheme for the same child until a preferred school is obtained, even after availing the benefit of admission under the scheme earlier. Such a practice would seriously undermine the purpose of Section 12(1)(c) and would result in unfair exclusion of other eligible children who are waiting for admission under the limited 25 per cent quota. The scheme is designed to distribute educational opportunities among as many eligible children as possible, and not to enable repeated reallocation of seats to the same beneficiary," holds the judgment pronounced on March 7.
In the present case, the bench noted, the petitioner's son had already been granted admission under the RTE quota for Class I, in the academic year 2024– 2025 and had thereby availed the benefit of the scheme. However, the petitioner voluntarily discontinued his son's education in that school due to personal inconvenience.
Upon him again filing an application for allocation of a seat under the RTE, the authorities while rejecting the plea, offered to accommodate the child in the previously allotted school and suggested the possibility of transfer in accordance with policy. However, the petitioner declined the said option and insisted upon fresh admission in Class I under the scheme for the academic year 2025–2026, the judges noted.
"In the considered view of this Court, such insistence is contrary to the spirit and scheme of the RTE Act. The cancellation of the admission by the authorities on the ground that the petitioner's son had already availed the benefit of the RTE 25 per cent reservation scheme in the academic year 2024–2025 cannot be said to be arbitrary, illegal or violative of any statutory or constitutional right," the judges opined.
The judgment, authored by Justice Venegavkar, stated that the decision of the authorities is consistent with the objective of ensuring fair allocation of the limited seats reserved under the scheme.
"The right to education under Article 21-A guarantees access to elementary education, but it does not confer upon a parent the right to repeatedly claim admission under a specific welfare quota after having already availed the benefit once," the bench underlined.
For these reasons, the Court did not find any merit in the petition and dismissed the plea.
Appearance:
Advocate Ramrao Nirmal appeared for the Petitioner
Assistant Government Pleader SK Tambe represented the State
Advocate RK Ingole represented the Education Officers.
Case Title: Sampatrao Ramrao Teli vs State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition 1885 of 2026)
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 107