View of the Indian Court. File | Photo Credit: Hind
The Supreme Court decided to enter after Tamil complained on Monday (September 1, 2025) to have more than 3,000 crore in the reimbursement of private schools for accepting economically disadvantaged students under the Law on Education Law (RTE) after refusing to divide Samagr Shiksha.
The bench headed by Judge Vikram NATH issued a formal notice of appeal of the state against the decision of the High Court in Madras of 10 June, which released reimbursement under the RTE law on the financial obligation of the Center to Tamil over the system. The 2009 Act requires that the private school administration be adopted by children from an economically disadvantaged environment to a range of 25% of their strength in the free entry level. The state is obliged to pay schools.
The Center at the High Court claimed that “there are problems concerning the payment of funds” within the Samagra Shiksha system, because Tamil refused to carry out National Educational Policy 2020 (NEP 2020). The state raised doubts about the three -sided NEP 2020 policy with a premium for Hindi and considered it a challenge for regional language diversity.
Senior Advocate P. Wilson, who appeared for Tamil Nadu, said that the center and the state have parallel responsibility for financing the education of poor and disadvantaged children under Section 7 of the RTE Act of 2009.
“The Madras High Court has made an incorrect decision that only the state is primarily responsible for these expenses. The Madras High Court ordered the state to be responsible for the academic year 2025–2026.
He said that the insistence of the Center for the Fund’s payout within the Samagra Shiksha system with observing the NEP’s instructions was arbitrary. The bench ordered the center to respond to the state petition in four weeks.
“It is well known that the central government is spreading its political agenda through the Samagr Shiksha system. A non -agreement in political ideology cannot become an obstacle to the State Government to make the provisions of Samagra Shiksha scheme and the RTE law, and the law on their full law.
Tamil Nadu claimed that the fundamental right to education cannot be introduced at the discretion of the center. The approach to education was part of the fundamental right to life. The state claimed that it rejected primary education to poor children without the elimination of funds forcibly committed on their rights.
The state stated that its share in the reimbursement for admission pursuant to the RTE law was only 28.81% of the total amount approved by the Center for Approval Center.
“Given the failure to expose the funds of the center, the state must bear the entire burden and place it in an acute financial situation that would continue to result in inconsistent implementation of the provisions of the RTE law,” Mr. Wilson said.
Read more
Published – 1 September 2025 22:07
