Today, On 14th July, The Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to merge over 100 primary schools with low student strength. The petition, filed by Taiyyab Khan Salmani, was mentioned for urgent hearing.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court agreed to hear a petition contesting the Uttar Pradesh government’s decision to merge over 100 primary schools with low student enrollment.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi decided to schedule the matter for the following week after advocate Pradeep Yadav, representing petitioner Taiyyab Khan Salmani, requested an urgent hearing.
Yadav asserted that the closure of hundreds of government schools would leave thousands of primary students without access to education, forcing them to attend neighbouring schools if the government’s June 16 order was not suspended.
He mentioned that the state government’s order had been challenged in the high court, which dismissed the petitions on July 7.
Justice Kant indicated that, although this was a policy decision, the court was willing to examine the matter if it involved the closure of government schools.
The petition stated that on June 16, the additional chief secretary of the state’s Basic Shiksha Department issued an order directing steps to merge schools managed under the supervision of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari and owned by the state government.
The plea noted,
“Consequent to which on dated June 24, 2025 the actual list of the schools which are being paired being 105 in numbers has been issued,”
The high court dismissed the petitions on July 7 without adequately considering the true facts and circumstances of the case, which the petitioner argued would adversely impact the already vulnerable education system in the state.
The petitioner contended that the policy decision was arbitrary, unreasonable, and violated Article 21A of the Constitution, as it contravened the provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, as well as the rules established by the state government.
The plea referenced Rule 4(1)(a), stating that it was obligatory for the state government to establish a school for children from Class 1 to 5 in any habitation without a school within a kilometer, provided that the habitation had a population of at least 300 people.