Right to Education | SC pulls up NCPCR over inadequate response on RTE quota implementation

On 29 September, the Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe came down heavily on the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) for its inaction in the implementation of the 25 per cent quota for Economically Weaker Section (EWS) as mandated under Section 12(1)(c) of the Right to Education Act, 2009. 

On 13 January 2026, Justices Narasimha and A.S. Chandurkar delivered a judgement in Dinesh Biwaji Ashtikar v State of Maharashtra, which mandated the implementation of the 25 per cent reservation for children belonging to EWS and disadvantaged groups to private unaided schools. The Bench impleaded NCPCR in the matter and directed it to coordinate with the National and State Advisory Councils to enforce the mandate under Section 12(1)(c). 

Appearing for NCPCR and the Center, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted compliance remains incomplete across several states and union territories, prompting the Bench to deem  NCPCR’s response as  inadequate. Criticising the inaction, Justice Narasimha remarked, “NCPCR being a statutory authority has a big role to play. Whoever heads the NCPCR must be sensitised about how much hope and trust is placed on its shoulders. How can they act so indifferent?”

The Bench further reiterated that the 13 January judgement places responsibility on the  NCPCR to oversee the implementation of the mandate as per the directives noted therein. The Judgement noted that the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of NCPCR shall guide the process of implementing the mandate under Section 12(1)(c).The NCPCR was also directed to collate information regarding rules and regulations framed by appropriate governments across  states and union territories by 31 March. 

In a strongly-worded remark, Justice Narasimha noted that it is not simply about collating information and that NCPCR must carry a wider responsibility in fulfilment of the mandate. Pointing out that without enforceable rules and regulations, the object of Article 21A and Section 12(1)(c) of the Act shall be rendered meaningless, he remarked, “Whoever heads the NCPCR gets sensitised to how much hope and trust has been placed on their shoulders”.

The Bench directed  the Chairperson and the Director of NCPCR to be present before it on the next date of hearing. 

The matter is scheduled to be heard on 27 October. 

(Note: This hearing report was prepared from external sources and available coverage of the hearing)