Supreme Court To Examine If Pupil -Teacher Ratio Fixed In Maharashtra Is Contrary To RTE Act

The Supreme Court recently issued notice in a petition challenging a 2024 Government Resolution(GR) issued by the State of Maharashtra under the Right of the Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009(RTE Act). As per the GR, the State has modified the criteria for sanctioning the teachers' posts based on the number of students in primary, upper primary, and secondary schools in the State of Maharashtra.

A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe issued notice on January 23 to the State of Maharashtra and the Commissioner of Education.

The petitioner, that is, an association of private educational institutions, has challenged the GR dated March 15, 2024, as defeating the purpose of the RTE Act.

As per Column I of the Schedule under the RTE Act, the number of teachers is for each class/division and not for each section, as has been erronenously construed by the State Government, the petitoner stated. Pupil-teacher ratio under the Schedule to the RTE Act for the 1st to 5th class is 30-40:1, whereas for 6th to 8th class is 35:1.

As per the submissions of the petitioner, GR is contrary to the policy and statutory scheme of the Schedule to the RTE with respect to the pupil-teacher ratio. Moreover, the power to amend the Schedule solely vests with the Government of India under Section 20, and such powers can't be exercised by the State Government.

It has been argued that the consequence of the said GR is that in schools where the number of students is not above a certain number, there would only be one sanctioned teacher for several classes. This is because the GR does not consider a class as a unit for measuring the pupil-teacher ratio, but a section, i.e. primary, upper primary, and secondary as a unit for measuring pupil- teacher ratio.

"The further consequence is that several schools/neighbourhood schools having fewer students will be shut down, defeating the object of RTE Act 2009," as submitted by the petitioner. This GR, while considering the sanctioning of teaching posts, completely ignores the infrastructural, distance and other criteria required for recognition of a school laid down in various State and Central statutes, including the RTE Act, 2009."

The special leave petition is filed against the December 1, 2025, order of the Circuit bench at Kolhapur of the High Court of Bombay. The High Court dismissed the plea of the petitioner on grounds that the coordinate bench of the Court has already decided the validity of the GR and rejected the same.

The Court has tagged the present SLP with a 2016 pending matter, where the interpretation of the Schedule to the RTE Act and the pupil-teacher ratio was in question.

Case Details: SINDHUDUURG ZILLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA CHALAK MANDAL, PANDUR (REGISTERED) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA and others|SLP (C) No. 2479/2026

Click Here To Read Order

Advocates: Mr. B.H. Marlapalle, Senior Advocate Mr. Ajit Pravin Wagh, Advocate-on-Record and Mr. Avinish Kr Saurabh, Adv.

Next day of hearing is March 13.