Court Dismisses Petition for Repeated Admission Under RTE Quota, Emphasizing Fair Allocation of Educational Opportunities
The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, has dismissed a writ petition filed by Sampatrao against the State of Maharashtra and others, seeking fresh admission for his son under the 25% reservation scheme of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act). The court underscored the RTE Act's goal of equitable access to education, stating that allowing repeated admissions under the scheme for the same child would undermine this objective.
In the case titled "Sampatrao v. State of Maharashtra," the petitioner sought a directive for fresh admission of his son in the First Standard for the academic year 2025-2026 under the RTE quota, despite his son already having availed the same benefit in the previous academic year. The court, led by Justices Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi and Hiten S. Venegavkar, held that such repeated claims are contrary to the spirit of the RTE Act and impede the equitable distribution of limited educational seats.
The petitioner argued that the authorities were obliged to grant admission once his son was selected through the lottery process. However, the court noted that the child had already been granted admission under the scheme in 2024-2025 and that the petitioner's insistence on fresh admission was not supported by any statutory right.
The court emphasized that the RTE Act is designed to expand educational access for economically weaker sections and disadvantaged groups, not to enable repeated allocation of seats to the same beneficiary. Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in "Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India," the bench highlighted the importance of implementing welfare legislation to advance social inclusion and equitable access.
Despite the authorities offering to accommodate the child in the previously allotted school and explore transfer options under existing policies, the petitioner remained adamant on fresh admission. The court concluded that the cancellation of the admission for the 2025-2026 academic year was neither arbitrary nor illegal, aligning with the RTE Act's objective to ensure fair allocation of limited seats.
The court's decision reaffirms the principle that the right to education under Article 21-A of the Constitution guarantees access to elementary education but does not confer a right to repeatedly claim admission under a specific welfare quota.
Bottom Line:
Right to Education Act - A child who has already availed admission under the 25% reservation scheme for economically weaker sections under the RTE Act cannot claim fresh admission for the same standard under the same scheme. Repeated claims for admission under the scheme would defeat the objective of equitable distribution of educational opportunities.
Statutory provision(s):
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 Section 12(1)(c), Article 21-A of the Constitution of India
Sampatrao v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB)(Aurangabad Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2867378
