The Supreme Court today issued notice on a petition alleging that the State of Punjab has failed to implement key provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, particularly the mandate under Section 12(1)(c) requiring private unaided schools to reserve 25% seats at the entry level for children belonging to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and disadvantaged groups.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana asked the petitioner appearing in person to place concrete material before the Court to demonstrate how the law was not being implemented.

The Chief Justice suggested that the petitioner seek data via RTI on the number of recognised private schools in a district, whether they are affiliated to CBSE or the State Board, the total sanctioned seats, the number of students enrolled, and the number admitted from EWS and marginalised sections.

“We are issuing notice. Meanwhile, just do this. That will help us in understanding the issue,” the Chief Justice told the petitioner.

During the hearing, the petitioner told the Court that the issue was not confined to individual schools and contended that the Act had not been implemented across Punjab for the last 15 years.

The Chief Justice noted that the State had filed an affidavit stating that 476 children belonging to EWS and disadvantaged groups had been admitted in private schools. “Therefore we want to know from you which schools are not implementing,” he said. He said that the petitioner would have to help the Court by showing how the statutory scheme was not being implemented.

The petitioner contended that at least 50,000 students should be admitted under the 25% quota every year because according to government figures, nearly two lakh students are admitted at the entry level in private schools annually in the state. He said that there has been continuous litigation regarding this grievance.

The Chief Justice asked how the private schools get paid for the admissions of EWS students. “What is the government policy? Do they compensate the schools?” the Chief Justice asked. He further remarked, “We hope you are not fighting for these private schools that they want to be paid by the government.”

The petitioner replied that the Act itself provides that the fee amount fixed by the government is to be paid to the schools. He stated that he had served as Joint Secretary in the Government of India in 2009 and had been involved in drafting the legislation. He told the Court that he had no interest in the private school sector.

The Chief Justice then suggested that the petitioner undertake a district-level study to provide concrete data about implementation of the Act. He suggested that a comparatively backward district be chosen for the same.

The petitioner informed the Court that he had filed RTI applications across districts seeking information on admissions and the responses indicated that no admissions had been made under the scheme in the past 15 years. Therefore, he sought directions for the Union Government to intervene.

The Chief Justice observed that the manner in which RTI queries are framed often affects the answers received, and the questions have to be framed intelligently.

The petition seeks directions to the Union Government to exercise its powers under Articles 256 and 355 of the Constitution to secure compliance by Punjab with the RTE Act, including Sections 12(1)(c), 12(2) and 18. Article 21A of the Constitution guarantees the fundamental right to free and compulsory education for children.

The petitioner has also sought directions for creation of a transparent, time-bound and publicly accessible mechanism to monitor compliance with Section 12(1)(c), including public dashboards, publication of available seats and admission schedules, an accessible application process, a reimbursement framework, and enforcement measures for non-compliance. The plea further seeks an affidavit from the Union Government detailing the steps proposed to ensure implementation of the Act in Punjab.

Case no. – W.P.(C) No. 697/2026

Case Title – K.S. Raju Legal Trust v. Union of India