The RTE Act, enacted under Article 21A of the Constitution, mandates free and compulsory education for all children aged 6 to 14 years. Its key provisions include: Mandating minimum infrastructure and teacher qualifications in schools, prescribing norms for student-teacher ratios, reserving 25% seats in private unaided schools for children from disadvantaged sections, and prohibiting capitation fees, screening procedures, and corporal punishment.

The Act applies to both government and private schools (aided and unaided), but exempted minority-run institutions in practice following judicial interpretation.  Under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, “All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.” This provision was designed to protect the cultural and educational autonomy of minority communities.

The Supreme Court has consistently held that this right is not absolute, but any “reasonable regulation” must not destroy the minority character of the institution.

In Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India (2014), a Constitution Bench of the SC held that: The RTE Act's provisions, especially the 25% reservation, infringe upon the rights under Article 30(1), therefore, unaided and aided minority institutions are exempted from the ambit of the RTE Act.  The Court also emphasized that imposing the RTE Act on minority institutions would effectively dilute their right to administer institutions of their choice.

This decision essentially created a constitutional buffer around minority institutions, shielding them from educational regulations that otherwise aim to ensure equitable access to quality education.  In September 2024, a two-judge Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, while deciding on the applicability of the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) to minority schools, expressed doubts about the correctness of the Pramati judgment.

The Right to Education under Article 21A is a fundamental right for all children, irrespective of their background, and exempting minority schools from compliance with minimum educational norms—such as teacher qualifications—may undermine the quality of education provided to children studying in such institutions.  The Bench asked whether children's rights should be compromised in the name of minority autonomy.  The Court has referred the matter for reconsideration by a larger Bench, signaling a potential re-evaluation of the balance between minority rights and children's right to education.

The current debate before the Supreme Court is not merely a legal technicality—it goes to the heart of India's commitment to both pluralism and social justice. The challenge is to preserve the cultural and religious autonomy of minority communities without compromising the universal right of every child to quality education.

As the case now awaits adjudication by a larger Bench, the nation watches closely to see how the judiciary reconciles these two fundamental constitutional mandates. The eventual ruling will have a profound impact on education policy, minority rights, and children's access to quality education in India.