Disposed

Maitri Vidya Niketan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Aug 2026WPC/5365/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by private unaided schools seeking higher reimbursement for uniforms and text books under the RTE Act. The Court directed the State Government to decide the pending representation within four months without expressing an opinion on the merits of the claim for actual cost.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to consider and decide the petitioner association's representation dated 4.9.2021 within four months.

Maitri Vidya Niketan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI

¶3

Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI

CGHC010337972021

2026:CGHC:36685

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶8

WPC No. 5365 of 2021

¶9

Maitri Vidya Niketan Risali Sector, Bhilai, District Durg (CG) Through S. Sanjeev Director, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Indu IT School, Kurud Road, Kohka, Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) Through Sanjay M Umak Director., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶11

Mile Stone Academy, Khapri District Durg (CG) Through Dr. (Mrs.) Mamta Shukla Director, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶12

Delhi Public School, Risali Sector, Bhilai, District Durg (CG) Through Pardshant Vashishta, Principal., District Durg (CG)

¶13

Chhattisgarh Private School Management Association A Registered Education Society, Registered Under The Societies Registration Act, 1973, Bearing No. Cg Rajya 3940, Having Office At J.D. Daga Higher Secondary School Premises, Civil Lines, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Through Its Secretary And Authorized Signatory Motilal Jain., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

... Petitioners

¶15

versus

¶16

State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶17

Director Public Instruction Directorate Mantralaya, Indravati Bhawan, Block-3, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶18

¶19

Divisional Joint Director (Public Instructions) Directorate Of Public Instructions, Mantralaya, Indravati Bhawan, Block-3, 1st Floor, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (CG)

¶20

District Education Officer, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶21

District Education Officer, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶22

District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)

¶23

... Respondents

¶24

For Petitioners	: Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Shotabdi Bagchi, Advocate
For Respondent-State	: Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Government Advocate
For Intervener.	: Mr. Deverishi Thakur, Advocate with Ms. Yogita Pandey, Advocate

¶25

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶26

Order On Board

¶27

17/08/2026

¶28

Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs:-

¶29

“10.1. It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records concerning the case of the petitioner Society from the possession of the respondents for its kind perusal.

¶30

10.2. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ quashing and setting aside the impugned memo / letter dated 03/04/2021 qua the petitioners and other member schools of petitioner Association are concerned by declaring the same to be illegal and inoperative in law.

¶31

10.3. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to further issue an appropriate writ commanding the respondents to consider and enhance the amount for the purpose of Uniforms,

¶32

¶33

Text Books & Writing Material per child to be supplied by the petitioners’ schools under the provisions of the RTE Act of 2009.

¶34

10.4. Any other relief / reliefs which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition may also please be granted to the petitioners.”

¶35

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner No.5 is registered society of 49 private schools located all over the State of Chhattisgarh. Petitioners No.1 to 4-Schools are the members of petitioner No.5. The provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short ‘the Act of 2009’) makes it obligatory on the private schools to provide uniforms, text-books and study material to the students admitted in such schools under the Act of 2009 and the schools are eligible for reimbursement of expenditure incurred in providing books, study materials and uniforms to such students. He further submits that the private unaided schools like petitioners affiliated to Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), are required to follow the syllabus on the pattern of syllabus given by the NCERT, which is not provided to such schools and is available in the open market only. The cost of books published by NCERT is higher than the amount fixed by the State Government vide memo dated 6.7.2018 towards cost of uniform, text books and others material to be provided to the students admitted under the Act

¶36

¶37

of 2009. Therefore, petitioner Association submitted detailed representation on 4.9.2021 before respondent No.2 seeking cancellation of the impugned memo dated 3.4.2021 and requesting that reimbursement towards supply of text books etc. to the students admitted in the private unaided schools under the Act of 2009 be made on the basis of their actual cost. However, despite lapse of considerable time, no decision has been taken on the said representation of the petitioners and therefore, a direction be issued to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending representation of petitioner No.5 within specified time period.

¶38

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State would submit that since the petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and only praying for decision on their pending representation, he is having no objection.

¶39

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Intervener has supported the case of the petitioners.

¶40

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents available in record of writ petition.

¶41

The Act of 2009 is a welfare legislation enacted to give effect to constitutional mandate contained under Article 21-A of the Constitution and to ensure free and compulsory elementary education to every child between six and fourteen years of age. This Act seeks to ensure universal access to quality

¶42

¶43

elementary education, particularly for children belonging to weaker sections and disadvantaged groups, by imposing corresponding obligations upon the Government, local authorities and schools. Section 12(1)(c) of the RTE Act requires a private unaided school to admit at least 25% of the strength of Class I from weaker sections and disadvantaged groups and to provide those children free and compulsory elementary education. Section 12(2) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 provides for reimbursement to a private unaided school in respect of the expenditure incurred by it on account of the admission of children under Section 12(1)(c) of the Act.

¶44

Having regard to the provisions contained in Section 12(2) of the Act of 2009, which contemplate reimbursement of expenditure incurred by a private unaided school in respect of children admitted under Section 12(1)(c) of the Act of 2009, and keeping in view that the State Government is competent to prescribe the measure and methodology for such reimbursement, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of petitioners, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation of petitioner association dated 4.9.2021 in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably

¶45

¶46

within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the order.

¶47

Petitioners will be at liberty to submit fresh representation before respondent No.2, if they so desire, and if petitioners submit fresh representation along with copy of the order passed by this Court, Respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of 04 months from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶48

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioners to reimbursement on the basis of the actual cost of the textbooks, and the Competent Authority shall consider the representation independently and in accordance with law. However, the petitioners will be at liberty to approach this Court if their grievance still subsists.

¶49

Certified copy as per rules.

¶50

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶51

roshan/-

Maitri Vidya Niketan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maitri Vidya Niketan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases