Patna High Court: Dismissed PIL Alleging Non-Compliance Of Provisions Of The Right To Education Act, 2009 By Schools In Bihar

The Patna High Court in the case Prem Kumar vs. The State observed and has dismissed the Public Interest Litigation, PIL wherein it is alleged that the non-compliance of the provisions of the Rights of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 by schools in Bihar.

The division bench comprising of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Madhuresh Prasad in the case observed and has stated that the petitioner approached the court by making vague and for sweeping allegations wherein it alleged the deficiencies in order to implement the Right to Education Act, 2009.
In the present case, the PIL was moved by one Prem Kumar, wherein it alleged that the schools were failing to fulfil the provisions of the Right to Education Act and were not providing free and compulsory education to children between the 6 years of age to 14 years of age.

However, the bench in the case observed and has stated that the Right to Education Act empowers various authorities in order to monitor and also to enforce the requisite standards which includes the directions issued.
The court in the case stated that having gone through the provisions of the RTE Act, the said court find that it had been enabled by the Right to Information Act the effective monitoring of all requisite standards which includes the powers to issue directions, wherein the powers have been conferred upon the Commission for Protection of Child Rights established at the State level and also at the National level as well as the appropriate Government and the Local Authority, thus, as the said case may be depending upon.
Further, it has also been noted by the said court that the petitioner in the case had not taken any steps in order to approach the specified authorities under the Right to Education Act with any kind of specific grievances.
The bench stated that it is not inclined to proceed with the matter as a Public Interest Litigation and leave it to upon the petitioner in order to invoke the remedies available as stated under the Right to Education Act.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the plea.