1993 (2) TMI 326 - SC - Indian Laws

Right to Education: State Regulations for Private Institutions

UNNI KRISHNAN J.P. Versus STATE OF A.P.

The Supreme Court held that the right to education is implicit in the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, subject to ... - Issues Involved:1. Whether the Constitution guarantees a fundamental right to education.2. Whether there is a fundamental right to establish an educational institution under Article 19(1)(g).3. Whether recognition or affiliation makes the educational institution an instrumentality of the State.Summary:Issue 1: Right to EducationThe Supreme Court addressed whether a citizen has a fundamental right to education, particularly for professional degrees. The Court concluded that the right to education is implicit in the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. However, this right is not absolute and is subject to the limits of the State's economic capacity and development. The Court emphasized that every child has a right to free education until they complete the age of 14 years (Article 45), and beyond this, the right to education is contingent on the State's resources (Article 41).Issue 2: Right to Establish Educational InstitutionsThe Court examined whether citizens have a fundamental right to establish educational institutions under Article 19(1)(g). It was held that while individuals may have the right to establish such institutions, this right is not absolute and does not include the right to recognition or affiliation, which are subject to regulatory conditions imposed by the State. The Court clarified that establishing educational institutions cannot be treated as a trade, business, or profession, as education is not a commercial activity.Issue 3: Recognition and AffiliationThe Court discussed whether recognition or affiliation makes educational institutions instrumentalities of the State. It was concluded that private educational institutions, even if recognized or affiliated, do not become instrumentalities of the State. However, these institutions perform public duties and are subject to Article 14, ensuring fairness and non-discrimination in admissions.Scheme for Regulation:The Court proposed a scheme to regulate admissions and fees in private professional colleges, emphasizing merit-based admissions and capping fees to prevent commercialization. Key points include:1. Professional colleges must be established by registered societies or public trusts.2. At least 50% of seats should be filled by government nominees based on merit, with the remaining 50% being payment seats also filled based on merit.3. Fees for payment seats should be regulated and not exceed prescribed ceilings.4. A competent authority should handle admissions and ensure transparency and fairness.Specific Cases and Provisions:- The Court struck down Section 3-A of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983, as it violated Article 14 by allowing admissions irrespective of merit and permitting capitation fees.- The Court allowed students admitted under the invalidated section to continue their education but directed the managements to refund excess fees collected.- The Court dismissed the petition challenging differential fees for outside students in Maharashtra, citing established precedent.Conclusion:The judgment underscores the importance of education as a fundamental right, subject to the State's capacity, and mandates regulatory measures to ensure fairness and prevent commercialization in private educational institutions. The proposed scheme aims to balance private initiative with public interest, ensuring access to quality education for all sections of society.