Supreme Court Questions Inclusion of Orphans in Right to Education Act’s Quota
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
On September 15, 2023, the Supreme Court of India raised a pertinent question regarding the Right to Education Act, 2009. The apex court sought clarity from both the Union Government and all State Governments on whether the term
“child belonging to disadvantaged groups,”
as defined under Section 2(d) of the Act, encompasses orphaned children. According to Section 12 of the Act, schools are obligated to reserve at least 25% of their seats for children from these disadvantaged groups.
Furthermore, the court inquired if the benefits provided to children orphaned during the COVID-19 pandemic under the PM Cares Fund could be extended to all orphaned children, irrespective of the cause of their parents’ demise.
The case was presented before a bench that included Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra. The next hearing has been scheduled four weeks from now.
The Union Government requested a postponement in the proceedings. Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee explained that he had recently taken charge of the case and required additional time to formulate a response. However, CJI Chandrachud highlighted that the case had been initiated in 2018 and had experienced numerous delays due to repeated adjournments.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioner, emphasized two primary demands:
- Extend the PM-Cares Fund benefits, currently available to children orphaned during the COVID-19 pandemic, to all orphans.
- Provide the benefits designated for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) under the Right to Education Act, specifically the 20% reservation in private schools, to all orphaned children.
The CJI acknowledged that the court had previously addressed the issue of benefits for children orphaned during the pandemic. He agreed with the petitioner’s argument against differentiating between orphans based on the cause of their parents’ death, stating,
“Orphan is an orphan irrespective of whether the father and mother died of an accident or illness.”
The petitioner, Poulomi Pavini Shukla, further argued that the Right to Education Act allows individual states to identify additional children eligible for benefits. She cited examples of Gujarat in 2013 and Delhi in 2015, where such inclusions were made through simple government orders without requiring extensive bureaucratic processes. She suggested that other states could follow suit.
Taking note of these arguments, the CJI reiterated the need for the ASG to clarify whether the benefits designed for children orphaned during the COVID-19 pandemic could be extended universally to all orphans.
Additionally, the court highlighted the petitioner’s request for the term
“child belonging to disadvantaged groups”
under Section 2(d) of the RTE Act to be expanded to include orphaned children, especially those facing social and educational challenges. The CJI directed both the Union of India and all state governments to consider this aspect and provide their responses.
Case Title: Poulomi Pavini Shukla v. Union Of India And Ors W.P.(C) No. 503/2018 PIL-W