Voluntarism option

Compliments for your in-depth analytical cover story on the Supreme Court’s verdict on the Right to Education Act (EW May). Now I have no doubt in my mind that what ails our education system, specially at the primary and secondary levels, is too much government control which the recent Supreme Court’s majority judgement has sanctified. The “control and command” policy of the education establishment is certain to discourage private entrepreneurship in education, leading to rise in costs of schooling and corruption.   I totally agree with the dissenting judgement of Justice Radhakrishnan that “this objective (of quality inclusive education) could have been attained by arousing the spirit of voluntarism within private independent schools”.   There are a large number of excellent schools across the country which of their own volition — long before the RTE Act was legislated — have been admitting underprivileged children by granting scholarships and freeships. In the Lawrence School, Sanawar we not only subsidise children whose parents cannot fully afford our fees but also grant scholarships to meritorious children and from defence services households. Moreover from last year we have adopted several orphaned children who receive equal education here free of charge. I am sure there are many other private schools which fulfil their social obligation in their own quiet ways. Praveen Vasisht Headmaster Lawrence School, Sanawar   RTE real objective   Thank you for your detailed cover story on the Supreme Court’s judgement which ill-advisedly upheld the RTE Act (EW May). I have yet to read as clear and lucid an explanation of the issues involved as in your brilliant narrative.  It’s now crystal clear that the real objective of the RTE Act is to close down budget schools which have emerged as competitors to dysfunctional government schools.   With the apex court having exempted minority schools from the impact of the Act, and having permitted the closure of private budget schools, now children of the poor will have no alternative but to attend government schools where they will learn nothing. It’s surprising the wise judges of the Supreme Court couldn’t see through this cunning strategy of the political class to keep the poor trapped in poverty and ignorance.  B. Devaiah on e-mail   Forced responsibility   Re your may cover story, the Supreme Court has approved by a majority of two against one, reservation of 25 percent seats for poor neighbourhood children in all unaided non-minority private schools in the country. Though the motive of this provision in the RTE Act is good, its application to private schools is questionable. The dissenting judgement of the third judge brilliantly articulates why it’s unfair for government to outsource its obligation of providing all children free primary education, to private schools.   Implementing the reservation provision will also have direct financial implications for parents as the cost of educating the 25 percent quota students will have to be borne by the remaining 75 percent. The responsibility to educate poor children cannot be forced upon individual citizens.   Three years after passing…