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.