All private schools have to admit 25% children from disadvantaged groups from their neighbourhoods for free education, which can be extended if the number is not filled up within the customary 1km radius; every year in the class in which they induct new children. If the induction class is class 1, then 25% children will be admitted therein each year, but if the induction is done in pre-school, then the quota will be filled there. The Act says ‘at least 25%’ instead of ‘at least and no more’, which implies that a school could offer to take more than 25% children.

Private aided schools shall have to admit children from similar backgrounds in the proportion of aid they receive from the government, in the induction class each year, and will not receive any extra reimbursement for these children. For example, if the total annual contribution from the government to an aided school is 70% of its total recurring expenditure for a particular year, it will have to admit 70% children in the induction class that year.

Either of these admissions each year shall be in the induction class only, and not for each class of the elementary stage.

As for payments, the appropriate government shall work out its per-learner cost by adding up all the recurring costs it incurs in one year, from its own and central funds including mid-day meals, and divide it by all the children enrolled in its schools. It will reimburse the unaided school admitting 25% children at this rate, or the fee of the school, which ever is less. If the school is already obliged to admit a certain number of children by a separate MoU, for subsidized land or other benefits it obtained from the state, then it will not receive reimbursement for the percentage of children covered by the MoU. The detailed procedure is outlined in Model Rules (7) and (8).

They will have to adhere to the norms and standards prescribed by the schedule and have three years to do so. Their teachers shall also be required to have the nationally prescribed teacher qualifications, within five years. They will have to get recognition within the three year period; if they don’t have recognition after three years, they can not function, and heavy fines will be imposed on them if they do. They can not take tests or interview children or parents for giving admission; all admissions have to be based on random selection and violations will lead to financial punishments. They must announce at the beginning of the term the fees they will charge, after that they can not ask for other charges during the year (capitation fees).

At any time of the year when he/she attains six years of age, or is an older out of school child.

No school, governmental or private, can detain (fail) or expel any child at the elementary stage. The Delhi High Court has already given a verdict on this on the basis of the Act (April 7, 2010), against St. Xavier’s School, Delhi, which had to take back all the children they had declared failed and expelled from the school.

This is a common perception since it is difficult to see beyond the centuries old custom and culture of failing and expelling children. That the learning level of a child who is punished by failure at any time in the elementary stage shall improve the next year has no educational or research backing. If at all, the social stigma of failure, particularly for a child coming from a poor home is more likely to ensure that the failed child shall drop off from the next year. It is a method to weed out children who are harshly judged for being ‘weak’ or ‘dull’, which may have a lot to do with the learning environment of the school, the psychological and coping stress on the child, rather than any innate deficiency in the child. More often, failure and expulsion of the child hides the deficiencies of the learning environment of the class room. That is why the CCE, which continuously monitors the learning levels of the child and helps in timely intervention is far superior educationally to annual or board examination based punishments of failure and expulsions. CCE also takes into account the interests, abilities and talents of the child beyond the school subjects that must be recorded while issuing the completion certificate at the end of the elementary stage (see also Q71). Properly implemented, CCE will ensure that children do not advance without learning better than mindless testing of children. Private schools in particular use the failure and expulsion route to weed out what they call ‘dull’ and ‘weak’ in order to keep their school brand at a premium to charge more fees. The Act attempts to prohibit this malpractice, which has been upheld by the Delhi High Court decision in relation to a prominent private school of Delhi, mentioned previously.

No, all schools must adhere to the norms. As per section 19 (1), no school shall be established (by the government), or recognized (private), if it does not fulfill the norms and standards prescribed by the Act.

If the problem is not rectified locally, the matter can go to NCPCR/SCPCR or the courts, as a serious violation of the law.

All government, government aided and special category schools shall have to constitute SMCs as per Section 21 of the Act; since private schools are already mandated to have management committees on the basis of their trust/society registrations, they are not covered by Section 21. A proposed amendment (see Q83) makes the SMC an advisory rather than a statutory body for schools covered under Article 29 and 30 of the constitution (minority schools).

The detailed procedure for the formation of SMCs is outlined in Model Rule 13. State governments may modify the procedure if they deem necessary. Apart from the statutory requirement that 75% members shall be parents of children studying in the school, 50% of the total members women, the model rule prescribes that the Chair and Vice Chairpersons should be from amongst the parents; it should meet at least once a month, the minutes of its meetings should be made public and so on.

It is elaborated in Model Rule 14. It will be a three year plan estimating student strength, teacher requirement under the prescribed PTR, additional infrastructural, financial requirements and so on. The requirement is that the combined school development plans of a local authority will identify requirements in a bottom up decentralized manner, for each panchayat, rather than in a top down centralized manner, as is the common practice.

Yes, it does at Section 23(1). An academic institution of the central government shall prescribe teacher qualifications that all teachers of the country must have within five years. This will include both the academic and professional qualifications. The central government has already notified that the National Council for Teacher Education shall prescribe teacher qualifications. A broader committee under MHRD has already sent its suggestions to the NCTE regarding the new teacher qualifications.

The term ‘para’ has many connotations. In terms of qualifications, all teachers will have to have the same qualification in five years, so there can be no less qualified ‘para’ teachers after five years. It can also mean contractual. That is covered by service rules and conditions, and since teachers are mostly state government employees (except for Kendriya, Navodaya or similar schools of the central government) that is a preserve of state governments and as per the Act will be prescribed by them. The Model Rules however mandate that the service conditions prepared by the states provide for and enable long term stake of teachers in the teaching profession. Short term teaching contracts would therefore not be compatible with such a principle.

These too are within the purview of the state governments and are to be prescribed by them. The Model Rule 18 (3) however lays down the principle that salaries and other benefits of teachers, including those handling out-of-school children, shall be that of regular teachers, and at par for similar work and experience.

Disciplinary action can be taken against the teacher (Section 24(2)). Under Model Rules 18(2) (a), it is prescribed that the service rules of teachers should mandate the accountability of teachers to the School Management Committees.

There is a certain ambiguity about this in the Act. Section 25(1) says that the PTR ratio shall be maintained in each school within six months of notification of the Act. However for implementing the schedule of norms and standards of the school, that prescribes the PTR ratio, a three year time period has been given. States like Bihar, UP, Assam and Orissa that need to recruit a huge number of new teachers could use this ambiguity by sanctioning all the required posts and redeploying teachers in the first six months, and complete all the recruitments as early as possible, within the three year time frame.

The Act bans all non-academic work by teachers, except elections, decennial census and disaster related tasks. Where as census involves work once in ten years, and disasters are rare, increasingly frequent elections do keep teachers away from schools for long periods of time, particularly the preparation of electoral rolls, and can violate the child’s right to quality education. Where as disallowing election duties for teachers would therefore be very desirable, the constitution however mandates that all central and state employees could be drafted for election work, which the Supreme Court has upheld:

Article 324(6) of the Constitution of India read with Section 159 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 makes it obligatory that the President (the Government of India), or the Governor (the Government of any state) as well as every local authority shall, when so requested by the Election Commission, make available to the Election Commission or to a regional Commissioner or to the Chief Electoral Officer or the Returning Officer, as the case may be, such staff as may be necessary for the performance of any duties in connection with an election.

In ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA, vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA,  the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that the services of those government servants who are appointed to public services and posts under the Central or State Governments as well as those who are employees of the local authorities will have to be made available for the purpose of election and any such government servant or employee of the local authority who shall defy the requisition, may receive suitable punishment.

Now that education is a fundamental right of children, the state governments could ensure, when requested by the Election Commission, to make available to the Commission staff other than school teachers, or for a minimal amount of time that does not interfere with their primary task of teaching.

It is banned for all teachers as defined under this Act, working in government or private elementary schools. Since this Act does not apply to secondary school teachers, the ban on tuitions under this Act shall not extend to them, though there might be other laws and service conditions at the state level that disallow tuitions for secondary school teachers, which will continue to remain in force.

Under Section 7(6b), the central government shall ‘develop and enforce standards for training of teachers’.

Providing technical support and resources to the state governments for promoting innovations, research, planning and capacity building is a task assigned to the central government (Section 7(6c)). Model Rule 19(2)(b) prescribes that a teacher may perform the tasks of curriculum formulation, development of syllabi, preparation of training modules and text book development, in a manner that these tasks do not interfere with his/her regular teaching.

What about innovation and research?