Case at a glance: The Chhattisgarh High Court has refused to interfere with a District Education Officer's order moving about 66 RTE-quota students to government schools after their private school closed its branch. It held that Article 21A and the RTE Act impose a continuing duty on the State, but do not confer “an absolute right to demand education exclusively within a private unaided institution of choice”.
About 66 RTE-quota students studied at the Kota branch of a private school, which the management merged into its separately recognised Bharni branch about 20 km away in another block. The school offered continued education there without a new admission fee and with transport at reasonable cost, and parents consented.
The District Education Officer, Bilaspur rejected the arrangement and, applying a 2022 State circular on closed private schools, directed that the students be moved to nearby government schools. The students challenged the order.
The Key Question Before the Court
Do RTE-quota students have a right to continue in another branch of a private unaided school after their branch closes?
State's Duty, Not a Right to a Private School
The Court held that neither the RTE Act nor the Chhattisgarh RTE Rules provide for automatic transfer between private unaided schools, and undertakings and parental consent cannot create an enforceable public-law right without enabling legislation.
Article 21A and Sections 8 and 9 of the RTE Act impose a continuing duty on the State, but do not give a right to education in a private school of choice. The circular was applied uniformly, so the Article 14 challenge failed. Listing the branch on the RTE portal did not create a legal right, and Section 18 and Rule 16 concern penal derecognition, not voluntary closure.
What the Court Actually Held
- No interference with the DEO's order.
- State to complete placement of the students in nearby government schools quickly.
- English-medium State schools, such as Atmanand schools, to get priority.
- Transfer certificates and records to be issued without delay for the 2026–27 session.
Why This Judgment Matters
- It clarifies the limits of RTE rights when private branches close.
- It places the burden on the State to ensure continuity of education.
- It shows courts protecting students while applying rules uniformly.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Parents and Students
- Seek priority placement in good government schools, including English-medium options.
- Ask for prompt transfer certificates.
For Schools and the State
- Follow the applicable circular and ensure records move without delay.
Key Takeaways
- No absolute right to a private school of choice under RTE.
- The State must ensure continued education.
- Uniform application of the circular upheld.
- Priority to English-medium government schools.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not as a matter of right, according to this ruling, without enabling legislation.
They will be placed in nearby government schools, with priority to English-medium schools.
Not by itself; it cannot create a public-law right without enabling rules.
Conclusion
The judgment balances the State's duty under Article 21A with the limits of private school obligations.
Practical takeaway: When a private branch closes, RTE students' remedy lies in timely, suitable government school placement.