Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2026 INSC 422
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. OF 2026
@ DIARY NO. 60657 OF 2024
LUCKNOW PUBLIC SCHOOL, ELDICO AND ANR. ...PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. …RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
1. Delay condoned.
2. This is yet another occasion for us to reiterate the constitutional and
statutory obligation of a ‘neighbourhood school’ to give admission to
students forwarded by the State Government without any delay. Such an
1
obligation is consistent with the constitutional philosophy , Section 12 of
2
the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 , as
well as Rule 8 of the U.P Right of Children to Free and Compulsory
3
Education Rules, 2011 . For the reasons to follow, we have affirmed the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
Jayant Kumar Arora
Date: 2026.04.28
14:56:24 IST
Reason:
1
Article 21A.
2
Hereinafter referred to as ‘RTE Act, 2009’.
3
Hereinafter referred to as the ‘UP RTE Rules, 2011’.
Page 1 of 10
direction of the High Court to grant admission to the respondent without
any delay.
3. The facts leading to filing of the present Special Leave Petition are
that the respondent no. 5 (‘student’) applied to the Basic Education
Department, State of Uttar Pradesh, for admission into pre-primary class
in a neighbourhood school in accordance with the procedure prescribed
under UP RTE Rules, 2011 for the year 2024-25. The student was duly
selected, and the published list containing her name was sent to the
petitioner school for admission into the pre-primary class.
4. On being selected and allotted to the petitioner school, the student
approached the school for completing the admission formalities, but she
was neither given admission nor permitted to attend the classes on the
ground that there is some uncertainty about the student’s eligibility. Under
4
these circumstances the student preferred a writ petition praying for a
direction to the State and other authorities for granting admission into the
petitioner school. High Court allowed the writ petition primarily on the
ground that schools cannot sit in appeal over a decision taken by the State
Government. The relevant portion of the impugned order is as follows:
“8. Bare perusal of the Rules would indicate that in Chapter 4 the
responsibility of schools and teachers have been provided
wherein under Rule 7, the Schools are mandated to ensure that
the children admitted in pursuance of Clause (c) of Section 12(1)
of RTE Act, 2009 shall not be segregated from other children in
the classroom nor shall their classes be held at place entirely
4
WRIT - C No. - 6121 of 2024.
Page 2 of 10
different from classes held for other children and that such
children are not discriminated from the list of the children and
record of all such children has to be maintained by the schools.
Rule 8 of the Rules of 2011 further provides that the process of
admission of children shall be totally transparent and details of
such children shall be maintained on a public website. It has
further been provided that out of the total applicants, all the
children who apply for admission but are not admitted for
whatever reason shall be informed in writing with the reasons
thereof and further it shall be binding for the school to follow the
process of admission prescribed by the State Government from
time to time.
9. Considering the entire scheme of the Act and Rules made
thereunder, it is noticed that once the process of admission is
completed and application forms have been duly scrutinized and
list is prepared allocating the children the school and the said list
being forwarded to the said school, the school has no option
except to grant admission to the students.”
5. There is no gainsaying in stating that the right to education, a
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution,
will remain an empty promise if the mandate of the RTE Act, 2009 is not
worked out in its letter and spirit. Under Section 38 of the RTE Act, 2009,
States are empowered to notify rules for carrying out the provisions of this
Act. Exercising this power, the State of Uttar Pradesh notified UP RTE
Rules, 2011, containing various measures for admissions to
‘neighbourhood’ schools – encompassing regulations from the stage of
admission to completion of elementary education.
6. The process of admission of children and reimbursement of their
education is governed by Rule 8 of the UP RTE Rules, 2011, which is
extracted below for ready reference:
Page 3 of 10
“8. Admission of children and reimbursement of per-child
expenditure by the State Government
(1) The process of admission of children referred to in clauses
(b) and (c) of section 12 (1) shall be totally transparent. The detail
of such children applying for admission shall be maintained by
the school regularly, which shall include the name, address, sex,
caste, date of birth of the child and the name, address,
occupation and monthly income of father/mother/guardian, detail
of whether child belongs to weaker section or disadvantaged
group. Such information shall be made public through website.
Out of the total applicants, all the children who applied for
admission, but not admitted for whatsoever reason, shall be
informed in writing with the reason thereof. It shall also be
binding for the school to follow the process of admission
prescribed by the State Government from time to time.
(2) The total annual recurring expenditure incurred by the State
Government, from its own funds, and funds provided by the
Central Government and by any other authority on elementary
education in respect of all schools established, owned or
controlled by it or by the local authority, divided by the total
number of children enrolled in all such schools as on 30th
September, shall be the per-child expenditure incurred by the
State Government.”
(emphasis supplied)
7. The mandate of the above Rule is clear. Once the government
assesses an application for admission under the 2009 Act, the school shall
proceed and be bound by other provisions as laid from time to time. The
limited window for the school to reconsider the government’s decision is a
conscious choice of the State to avoid delays in securing the children's
right to education.
8. This regulatory framework finds its normative strength in the
5
neighbourhood school concept enshrined under the RTE Act, 2009 ,
which is a deliberate statutory conception to operationalise equality of
5
See, generally, Section 12 of the RTE Act, 2009.
Page 4 of 10
status and social integration during a child’s formative years. By
mandating that schools admit children from weaker and disadvantaged
sections to the extent of at least twenty-five percent of class strength, the
law seeks to transform the social structure of our society. This model
envisages the school as a common civic space that breaks down
entrenched barriers of caste, class, and gender, thereby advancing
substantive social justice.
9. The obligation of a “neighbourhood school” to admit children
belonging to weaker and disadvantaged sections of our society, to the
extent of twenty-five percent of the class strength, under Section 12 of the
RTE Act, 2009 has the extraordinary capacity to transform the social
structure of our society. Earnest implementation can truly be
transformative. It is not only a step towards educating young India, but also
a substantive measure in securing the preambular objective of ‘equality of
status’. The constitutional declaration of the right under Article 21A,
followed by the statutory mandate under Section 3 of the Act for free and
compulsory elementary education can be realised only with effective
implementation of the provisions of the Act. Ensuring admission of such
students must be a national mission and an obligation of the appropriate
government and the local authority. Equally, Courts, be it constitutional or
civil, must walk that extra mile to provide easy access and efficient relief
to parents who complain of denial of the right.
Page 5 of 10
6
10. In Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. , it was held
that the consequence of identifying the right to elementary education as a
positive right is the recognition of co-relative duties and identification of
five duty bearers, being (i) the appropriate government, (ii) the local
authority, (iii) the neighbourhood schools, (iv) the parents/guardians, and
(v) the primary school teachers. It is important to highlight the obligations
and duties of these duty bearers in detail not only for accountability, but
also to ensure that they have sufficient support from the Government and
7
the society.
10.1 The first duty bearer ; is the “appropriate Government”. The duty of
the appropriate Government to establish neighbourhood schools is
8
prescribed in Section 6 . The financial responsibilities under the Act are
shared between the Central and the State Governments under Section 7.
Further duties upon establishing the neighbourhood schools are
prescribed in Section 8, which inter alia mandate that the appropriate
government shall, “ensure availability of a neighbourhood school as
9
specified in Section 6”.
6
2026 INSC 56.
7
Para 6 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
8
“ Section 6. Duty of appropriate Government and local authority to establish school - For carrying
out the provisions of this Act, the appropriate Government and the local authority shall establish, within
such area or limits of neighbourhood, as may be prescribed, a school, where it is not so established,
within a period of three years from the commencement of this Act.”
9
Para 6.1 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
Page 6 of 10
10
10.2 The second duty bearer ; is the “local authority” . To ensure
implementation of the right at the grassroot level, Section 9 obligates the
local authority to ensure availability of a neighbourhood school as
specified in Section 6 (Section 9(b)), maintain records of children up to the
age of fourteen years (Section 9(d)) and also ensure and monitor
admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by every
11
child residing within its jurisdiction (Section 9(e)).
10.3 The third duty bearer ; is the neighbourhood school. Under Section
12, a neighbourhood school is impressed with the responsibility of
providing free and compulsory education. Section 12 mandates that the
“neighbourhood schools” shall admit in Class I, to the extent of at least
twenty-five percent of the strength of that class, children belonging to
weaker section and disadvantaged group for free and compulsory
education. We will be examining this obligation of the school under
12
Section 12(1)(c) in detail.
10.4 The fourth duty bearer ; is the Parent. This duty is now constitutionally
13
recognised in Article 51A(k) of the Constitution.
10
Section 2(h) -“local authority” means a Municipal Corporation or Municipal Council or Zila Parishad
or Nagar Panchayat or Panchayat, by whatever name called, and includes such other authority or body
having administrative control over the school or empowered by or under any law for the time being in
force to function as a local authority in any city, town or village;
11
Para 6.2 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
12
Para 6.3 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
13
Para 6.4 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
Page 7 of 10
10.5 The fifth duty bearer ; is the elementary school teacher. There is no
human resource or value higher than development of a student’s mind and
character. Therefore, the elementary school teachers have the most
14
important role in nation building.
11. It is necessary to underscore two foundational constitutional values
that Section 12 of the RTE Act, 2009 is designed to articulate and secure.
The first, in unequivocal terms, mandates that not less than twenty-five
percent of the strength of an entry-level class shall be reserved for and
filled by children belonging to “weaker sections” and “disadvantaged
groups”, who are thereby guaranteed access to free elementary
education. The second is that such children are to be admitted to unaided
schools in their neighbourhood, thereby embedding within the statutory
framework the principle that the constitutional promise of education under
Article 21A is to be realised through common local schools rather than
segregated or parallel systems. The legislative choice to implement the
right to free and compulsory education through neighbourhood schools is
not merely administrative; it is a deliberate constitutional strategy to
operationalise equality of status, dignity, and social integration among
15
children in their formative years.
14
Para 6.5 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
15
Para 7 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
Page 8 of 10
12. The mandate under Section 12 of the Act must be enforced with
conviction and commitment. We have to ensure admission of at least
twenty-five percent of class strength in unaided schools with children of
weaker and disadvantaged groups. This is certainly a national mission.
Effective implementation of the statutory policy will be transformative and,
in this regard, each one of us, be it the institution or an individual, be it the
Central or the State Governments, Advisory Councils or Commissions are
duty bearers. The most important role is of the neighbourhood schools. In
this mission, the judiciary also bears the burden to ensure that the process
of admission is easily accessible, effective and efficient. Court must also
ensure that judicial remedies against inaction or inefficiency are redressed
16
effectively and expeditiously.
13. Effective implementation requires that schools publish available
seats well in advance and that any denial of admission be recorded with
specific reasons, which must be reviewed by educational authorities within
strict timelines to ensure accountability. Ultimately, the success of the RTE
legislation depends on ensuring that children's participation in the
classroom is evident and meaningful.
14. It is in the above light we find that for schools like the petitioner that
may have some disagreement with the selection by the Government, can
16
Para 10 of Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar (supra).
Page 9 of 10
make representation to the concerned authority, but they ought not wait
for the outcome of such a representation and are mandated to grant
admission to the student whose name finds mention in list forwarded to
the school in the interregnum. This immediacy is essential to actualise the
promise of Article 21A of the Indian Constitution.
15. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are not inclined to interfere
with the impugned judgment and order of the High Court. The Special
Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.
16. No orders as to costs.
………………………………....J.
[ PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA ]
………………………………....J.
[ ALOK ARADHE ]
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 28, 2026.
Page 10 of 10