State Can't Compel Minority School To Provide Free Education To Journalists' Children Under RTE Act: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has held that minority educational institutions cannot be compelled to provide free education to the children of journalists by invoking the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act). [2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 103]

The Court held that the RTE Act is inapplicable to minority educational institutions in view of the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench decision in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India. It further held that State lacked statutory authority to extend such a benefit to a particular class of persons merely on the basis of representations made by journalists' associations.

Allowing two writ petitions filed by the Brothers of St. Gabriel Educational Society and its institutions, Justice Juvvadi Sridevi observed:

"The material available on record does not disclose any provision under the RTE Act or the Rules framed thereunder empowering the respondents to direct all private recognized schools, much less minority educational institutions, to provide free education to all children of journalists. However, the respondents themselves have admitted in the counter that the impugned proceedings were issued only on the basis of requests made by journalists' associations. Administrative instructions issued merely on the basis of such requests cannot override constitutional protections nor can they create obligations unsupported by statutory authority."

The Court held that the impugned directions were "arbitrary, without authority of law, contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court" and violative of the constitutional protection guaranteed to minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution.

The petitions challenged proceedings by District Educational Officers directing various private recognised educational institutions to provide free education to the children of journalists in Hyderabad, under the provisions of the RTE Act.

The petitioners, which run minority unaided educational institutions, contended that the directions were contrary to Articles 14 and 30(1) of the Constitution and the Supreme Court's decisions in Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India and Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India, which held that the provisions of the RTE Act cannot be enforced against minority educational institutions.

The petitioners further argued that journalists do not constitute a specially privileged class entitled to free education and that even where the RTE Act applies, the obligation to provide free education is confined to children falling within the categories recognised under the statute and only to the prescribed percentage of seats. 

The State, in its counter affidavit, submitted that journalists' associations had represented that private recognised schools were collecting exorbitant fees and that many journalists belonged to economically weaker sections and were unable to afford such fees. It was further stated that the impugned instructions were issued pursuant to those representations. The respondents, however, admitted that the instructions were "not mandatory in nature" and had been issued only on the request of the journalists' associations.

Examining the issue, the Court noted that there was no dispute that the petitioners were minority educational institutions entitled to the protection of Article 30(1). Referring to the Supreme Court's decisions in Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan and the Constitution Bench judgment in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust, the Court observed that it stood conclusively settled that the provisions of the RTE Act, including Section 12(1)(c), cannot be enforced against minority educational institutions, whether aided or unaided, as doing so would interfere with their constitutional right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

The Court also found merit in the petitioners' contention that the authorities had no jurisdiction to extend the benefit of free education to a specific class such as children of journalists in the absence of any statutory provision or governmental policy. Observing that the respondents themselves had admitted that the impugned proceedings were issued only on the basis of requests from journalists' associations, the Court held that such administrative instructions could not override constitutional protections or impose obligations unsupported by law.

The Court further held that the impugned proceedings had direct financial and administrative consequences for the petitioners' institutions and, therefore, adherence to the principles of natural justice was "indispensable" before issuing such directions. The failure to afford an opportunity of hearing rendered the impugned action "arbitrary and unsustainable", it held.

Accordingly, the Court allowed both writ petitions and set aside the impugned proceedings directing the petitioners to provide free education to the children of journalists.

Case Title: Brothers of St. Gabriel Educational Society & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Ors.

Case Nos.: W.P. Nos. 5035 and 13240 of 2015

Appearance: Sri Ch. Samson Babu for the petitioners; Government Pleader for School Education for the respondents.

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 103