Rajasthan High Court: In a civil writ petition filed by a minor petitioner through his father, challenging the rejection of his application for admission to a private school under the Right to Education Act, 2009 (‘RTE Act’), a Single-Judge Bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J. while allowing the petition, held that a fundamental right, especially one as significant as the Right to Education, cannot be denied on the basis of technicalities or procedural irregularities. The Court observed that once a petitioner has been selected under the lottery draw for admission in the Economically Weaker Section (‘EWS’) category, his application cannot be rejected merely because his Aadhaar Card did not contain the residential Ward number.
Background
The petitioner, through his father, filed a writ petition seeking to enforce his right to education as guaranteed under Article 21-A of the Constitution. The petitioner had applied for admission to respondent school, under the provisions of the RTE Act. His application was initially rejected on 21-04-2025 on the grounds of submitting incorrect documents, specifically that the Aadhaar Card did not bear the Ward Number where the petitioner resided. The date for verification and rejection of applications was subsequently extended until 08-05-2025. On that date, the petitioner submitted a document, which was issued by a competent authority and attested by a Gazetted Officer, clearly indicating that he was a resident of the Ward. Despite this submission, the respondents did not consider his application and rejected it. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present petition.
Analysis and Decision
The Court, upon hearing the submissions, noted that the petitioner’s application was rejected solely because his Aadhaar Card did not mention his residential ward number. The Court observed that the respondents had miserably failed to consider the annexure document filed by the petitioner for the purpose of granting admission and including the petitioner’s name in the lottery process.
The Court noted that the Section 35(1) of the RTE Act and the Rajasthan Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011, states that it is a fundamental right of a child belonging to disadvantaged group to get admission under the aegis of RTE Act to any School situated in his/ her neighbourhood. No distinction could be made out based on having residence in a particular ward that a neighbourhood school is situated in a different Ward.
The Court referred to Sudheer Kumar v. State of U.P., 2017 SCC OnLine All 4372, which discussed the concept of a ‘neighbourhood school’. The Court noted that while the concept of neighbourhood is relevant, the obligation on unaided schools under Section 12(1)(c) of the RTC Act is independent of the obligation on the government to establish schools. A school could not refuse admission to a child on the ground of the school not being located within the child’s neighbourhood.
The Court also referred to Jiya v. Maharaja Agrasen Model School, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 2126, where it was held that while a child has a right to free and compulsory education until the age of fourteen, they do not have a constitutional right to be educated in a particular school of their choice.
The Court concluded that the right of the petitioner, under Article 21-A of the Constitution and under Section 12 of the RTE Act cannot be curtailed merely on the account of technicalities or any other procedural irregularities. The Court noted that,
“A fundamental right, especially when it unequivocally accrues in favour of a citizen, cannot be tossed even on the basis of the procedural grounds or technicalities.”
The Court observed that once the petitioner was selected for getting admission in respondent school, under a lottery draw, his application could not be rejected merely on a technical count that his Aadhar Card was not carrying the number of his residency Ward. The Court noted that the respondents could have asked the petitioner to furnish a documentary proof with regard to his residential Ward, instead of rejecting his application.
In light of afore-stated findings, the Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to admit the petitioner to the school within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.
[Daivik Rangwani v. State of Rajasthan, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 4680, decided on 03-09-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: M. Naseer Khan for Rizwan Ahmed, Advocates
For the Respondents: Bhavya Kala for Devansh Sharma, Dy. GC., Udit Purohit, Advocates
Buy Constitution of India HERE
