JALDI

Jaldi-Vidhi

Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust v. The State of Maharashtra

Case details and hearing information from the Constitution Bench Pendency Portal.

612

Message
show

Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust v. The State of Maharashtra

This case seeks to re-examine the 2014 ruling of the Supreme Court in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India that excluded Minority Educational Institutions from the purview of the Right to Education Act, 2001.

Petitioners Arguments
Strict TET requirement amid low pass rates and rising teacher demand will lead to shortage of teachers which will undermine the objectives of the Right to Education (RTE) Act. TET is not a ‘minimum qualification’ under Section 23 of the RTE Act , but it is merely an eligibility test to assess teaching aptitude. Law made in exercise of the mandate of Article 21A should not abrogate the rights of minority educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution. The valid and invalid provisions of the RTE Act are inseparable and, thus, the entire RTE Act cannot apply to minorities and if, at all, the issue is referred to a larger Bench, the same has to be restricted to the applicability of Section 23 of the RTE Act. The Constitution Bench in Pramati upheld the exemption granted to minorities under Article 15(5) , to protect the minority character of the institutions, and to prevent the majority from making a law imposing the general gamut of laws on minority institutions. This is backed by precedent in Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India . Imposing TET qualification for promotion may cause hierarchical stagnation, which could not have been the intention of the Parliament. Retrospectively revoking benefits acquired under existing rules would violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Responders Arguments
The right to be taught by qualified teachers cannot be limited or impeded, except to the limited extent provided for under Article 29 or Article 30 of the Constitution. To exempt a particular category of institutions would be contrary to Article 21A of the Constitution of India and create an artificial distinction. A composite reading of Section 23 of the RTE Act reveals TET is a mandatory and an indispensable qualification/eligibility criterion to ensure the maintenance of quality education, irrespective of their classification as minority/majority or aided/un-aided institutions. Judgment of a larger Bench of this Court can be explained by a smaller bench. Similarly, the judgment in Pramati , in particular paragraph 55, can be adequately explained in the present case by providing a context to the RTE Act with the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) scheme. Only in the event that this exercise cannot be undertaken, the question of reference to a larger Bench may arise. Paragraph 55 of Pramati is merely obiter dicta and will not lead to a conclusion insofar as applicability/eligibility criteria for appointment of teachers is concerned. Applicability of the RTE Act to minority institutions was incidental to the main issue and not essential to the decision. In Pramati, this Court was never called upon to decide the constitutional validity of the entire RTE Act or even Section 23 thereof. The Court was restricted to the validity of the Constitution (Ninety-third) Amendment Act, 2005 and Constitution (Eighty-sixth) Amendment Act, 2002 . It cannot be said that the Constitution Bench in Pramati was seized of the question as to whether the entire RTE Act was unconstitutional.
Last Listed On
2026-02-24
Start Date
2025-02-03
Review Petition No
C.A. No. 1385/2025
Case Status
Pending
Bench Status
Not Constituted
Subject Matter
Constitution
Pendency
9 months, 29 days

5 Judge Bench

Reference to larger bench

Consider As Stage Of Pendency
true

Date of institution of case

Date of reference to 5 Judge Bench

The case arose from a bunch of petitions challenging judgments and orders passed by the Bombay and Madras High Courts, all of which involved the issue of qualification in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) as a mandatory condition for appointment and promotion in teacher posts in educational institutions. The appeals also included aggrieved Minority Educational Institutions (MEIs) like those run by the Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust which relied on the 2014 Constitution Bench ruling in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India , which had held that the Right to Education (RTE) Act (under Section 23 of which the TET was notified) did not apply to either aided or unaided MEIs. In Pramati, the validity of the 93rd Constitutional Amendment which added clause (5) in Article 15 of the Constitution, and the 86th Constitutional Amendment which inserted Article 21-A , providing for the right to education as a fundamental right, was up for challenge before the Supreme Court. The Court upheld the validity of Article 21-A, and by extension, the RTE Act, but carved out an exception for MEIs. Striking a balance between the right to education under Article 21A and minority rights under Article 30(1) , it held that the minority character of MEIs would be affected if they were made to comply with provisions of the RTE Act that would require them to provide reservations to students not belonging to the minority community.

Can the TET examination be mandated as a criterion for becoming a teacher of an MEI and whether providing such a qualification would affect the fundamental rights of MEIs? Does Article 30(1) envisage blanket immunity to MEIs from all forms of regulation such as those flowing from Article 21A ? Can the RTE Act function as a reasonable restriction under Article 19(6) on the exercise of the right to occupation of teachers under Article 19(1)(g) ? How far does Article 141 permit the Supreme Court to re-examine legal principles laid down in its previous judgments? Does excluding MEIs from the scope of the RTE Act threaten the principles of universal access to elementary education and common schooling that are fundamental to Article 21A?

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009

Article 21A of the Constitution of India

Article 30 of the Constitution of India

Article 141 of the Constitution of India

Observing that exempting minority schools from the ambit of the RTE Act may undermine universal access to basic education guaranteed under Article 21A , The two-judge bench expressed “serious doubt” over whether the blanket exemption outlined in Pramati was correctly decided, and referred the matter to the CJI for consideration of the issue by a larger bench.

Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India AIR 2014 SC 2114

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Patel Sadiya Abdul Lateef

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-01
Case No
C.A. Nos. 1364–1367 / 2025

V. Vanaja v. State of Tamil Nadu

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1389 / 2025

State of Tamil Nadu v. R. Varun

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1390 / 2025

Director of School Education v. M. Velayutham

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1391 / 2025

State of Tamil Nadu v. K. A. Karpagam

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1393 / 2025

State of Tamil Nadu v. TET Passed Candidates Welfare Association

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1395 / 2025

V. Vanaja v. Union of India

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. Nos. 1396–1397 / 2025

State of Tamil Nadu v. P. Suresh Kumar

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1398 / 2025

Director of School Education v. G. S. Senthil Kumar

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1399 / 2025

Director of School Education v. A. Choodamani

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1401 / 2025

State of Tamil Nadu v. V. Vanaja

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1403 / 2025

Tamil Nadu Asiriyar Kootam (Tamil Nadu Teachers Federation) v. State of Tamil Nadu

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1404 / 2025

State of Tamil Nadu v. R. Sakthivel

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. No. 1405 / 2025

Tamil Nadu Elementary School Teachers Federation v. Union of India

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. Nos. 1406–1408 / 2025

S. Sakunthala v. Union of India

Date Of Institution Start
2025-02-03
Case No
C.A. Nos. 1409–1410 / 2025

Supreme Court Doubts Correctness Of Judgment Exempting Minority Schools From RTE Act; Refers To CJI

Supreme Court Doubts Correctness Of Judgment Exempting Minority Schools From RTE Act; Refers To CJI
Source Of Info
LiveLaw
Date Of Fr
2025-09-01

Teacher’s Eligibility Test required to continue in service; applicability on minority institutions to be examined by larger Bench: Supreme Court

Teacher’s Eligibility Test required to continue in service; applicability on minority institutions to be examined by larger Bench: Supreme Court
Source Of Info
Bar & Bench
Date Of Fr
2025-09-01