The Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra Government to undertake a comprehensive review of the existing reimbursement mechanism under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The Court suggested examination of the issues of prescription of definite timelines at every stage of processing reimbursement proposals and the adequacy of a monitoring mechanism for ensuring compliance with such timelines.

A Division Bench comprising Justice R. I. Chagla and Justice Farhan P. Dubash was hearing a contempt petition filed by schools alleging willful and deliberate breach of an earlier order of the Court, where the State had agreed that the petitioners' pending dues would be reimbursed within eight weeks.

The State assured the Court that it would comply with the earlier order and release the admissible amount payable to the petitioner-schools within four weeks and, in any event, not later than September 4, 2026.

The Court noted that the matter has once again brought to the fore a recurring issue concerning reimbursement under Section 12(2) of the RTE Act. It emphasized:

“The RTE Act is a beneficial social welfare legislation enacted to give effect to the fundamental right to education by ensuring that every child between the ages of six and fourteen years, receives free and compulsory elementary education.”

The Court observed that while the State Government had framed the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010 and issued notifications prescribing the procedure for reimbursement, neither the Rules nor the Notification prescribe any timeline for processing the proposal and releasing the reimbursement amount.

It noted that the absence of a prescribed timeline had resulted in administrative difficulty:

“Schools are required to continue admitting students under the statutory quota and incur expenditure… However, reimbursement proposals often remain pending for years together, thereby placing substantial financial burden upon such institutions.”

While conceding that the State is undoubtedly entitled to scrutinize every proposal and ensure strict compliance with the statutory requirements before releasing public funds, the Court observed that such scrutiny must be within a reasonable period, and administrative verification cannot become a justification for indefinite inaction.

The Court further observed that the consequences of such delay were evident from the repeated litigation reaching the Court, noting that no fewer than 133 writ petitions seeking directions for release of reimbursement under Section 12(2) had been instituted between January 1 and August 6, 2026 alone.

“Such recurring litigation not only imposes avoidable hardship upon educational institutions but also results in unnecessary consumption of judicial time in matters which ought ordinarily to be resolved administratively,” the Court remarked

The Court therefore directed the State Government to undertake a comprehensive review of the existing reimbursement mechanism, including prescription of definite timelines at every stage, establishment of an appropriate monitoring mechanism and examination of the adequacy of the existing reimbursement amount.

The Court remarked that it expected the State Government to constitute an appropriate Committee comprising senior officers of the Finance Department and the School Education and Sports Department to examine the issues.

Case Title: Om Education Society and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra [Contempt Petition No. 408 of 2026 in Writ Petition No. 3834 of 2026]

Click Here To Read/Download Order