MODERN DRONACHARYA AND EKLABYA IN INDIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM

Who says Education is Charity I think it is most lucrative business in the India where one can use the public resorces and privileges to run their business and earn tax free black money with the help of Govt agency. our acadmician who are so called expert in the field of education are also very much influenced by our history specially dronacharya who want all respect and renumeration but prefer to teach their Arjuna and Duryadhan but not Eklabya.In mahabharta only Dhritarastra was supporting this kind of education but now our three pillars of Democracy and sometime fourth also practically supports this system which is for their benifit as the elite class is benifitted from this cruel system which protects the private schooling system in present manner.

  The system of private schooling is meant only for elite class and sometime it surprises us when the policy makers and courts talks abut feasibilty and affordability of this private system as the middle class interest is only discussed. Several state government allotted the land at throw away price to the so called charitable societies to perform their so called Charity. The annual returns of the societies showing that the societies are diverting fund to purchase luxury cars to perform their charity. Most of schools secured their interest by taking huge loans from the banks by mortgaging the public property. Asstets are crated for society and the underprivileged group are deprived from their share in freeship admission to balence the interst of middle class. Our pillars of democracy permits the autonomy on the ground that the govt. system is failed and they have to prserve these traders who is atlest providing education to elite class.

Gandhian thought says that the most deprived has the first right on the Public resources but our nehru model rejects the gandhian thought and it had proved that only the elite class of society has their right on the resourses of the country. Verious movements including Anna movement and kejriwal aam aadmi movement also fights for middle class which want to exploit the public resources including the share of underprivileged group of society without paying any bribe to government officers.
       

BASIC PROBLEM ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION OF RTE IN NURSERY ADMISSION

Basic problem for implementation of RTE: - Parliament legislated a bivalent legislation Right of children to free and compulsory education Act 2009, A child centric Act but our system is habituated to see every thing in education in a school centric way. It is similar to use concave mirror in side mirror of a vehicle which produces inverted image and causes big accident for parents seeking admission in nursery.  To understand the nursery admission scheme one had to see this child centric act by taking child as center but unfortunately wee see everything school centric.

     To understand provisions of admission under RTE Act 2009 one have to understand the provisions of this act starting from section 9(d) which states about child mapping by local authority which includes all children below 14 years irrespective of economic or social background. If we read this provision with rule 10 specially sub clause 4(c) then it is clear that the act deals with pre primary class also. Section 11 is next step and some part of section 11 is included in section 12(1)(c) proviso where 25% seats are allocated to EWS parents and remaining 75% to open category where parent can’t claim re-reimbursement from government. Legislature was well aware with the non availability of Pre School in government school and 25% under EWS can’t feed all children in the age group. There are several economic constraints hence it was not included in the definition of child as the extended definition of child could impose extra burden on government to start pre school education for all children hence a suggestion to government has been given but it does not means that the act does not deals with admission below 6 in private school under open category admission. We must understand that the aim of the act is inclusive education and segregation is not permissible then how the act could include EWS by excluding students admitted under open seats category.

       Section 13 of the act is the penal provisions which strengthen the RTE Act 2009 which must be read for all children covered under provisions of section 9(d), Section 11 or any other section of the act which includes child defines under definition part of the act. If we read strict definition of the child defined between age 6 and 14 then it will make the entire object of the act redundant. Our legislature can’t have the view to limit section 13 between 6 to 14 only as it will allow capitation legal for children whom local authority sends in neighborhood school. In the city like Delhi where admission is allowed at entry level only then section 13 which apply at the time of admission only will be a redundant provision. It will allow corporal punishment permissible for children below 6 years and will be restrictive after 6 years. If a child admitted below 6 years can be holded in nursery class for several years but a child after 6 will not be holded by school.

       Provision under section 9(d) solves the issue about address proof hence it has not been dealt under the act but section 14 deals with birth certificate and removes the barrier by allowing affidavit.

       Parent has choice of admission in some other schools of their choice but not at the cost of children for which that school is neighborhood school. If a school has catered all in neighborhood has catered then only choice of parent seeking admission in the school can be considered. The choice of parent is not a right and subject to seats available after admitting all students in neighborhood. It is possible that more then one school is in the neighborhood then the choice of parent can be considered under neighborhood and in the case of more application then seats the draw of lots can be used as a random method.