There is no attempt in the Bill to calculate its financial implications.
Unless the required financial resources are calculated and a provision made in the Bill, free and compulsory education to the children in the age groups 6-14 is unlikely to become available in the foreseeable future.
norms relating to availability of a school at a particular distance from the habitation of children,
types of schools,
students and teachers per school and per class room,
school furniture, laboratories, medical facilities etc
Responsibility of Schools to provide free and compulsory education
Different scales of responsibility have been laid down for different types of schools for providing free and compulsory education. This violates both Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 21A (Right to Education) of the Constitution.
There is no alternative to the establishment of a Common School System in India
The concept of neighbourhood as provided in the Bill is in relation to a child and not in relation to a school. This has the effect of exempting certain schools, mainly unaided private schools, from the responsibility of admitting all the children in the neighbourhood.
Though Article 21A of the Indian Constitution on Right to Education does not extend this right to children below the age of 6, it is very difficult to ignore pre-primary education in any scheme for providing free and compulsory education.
The ICDS under which pre-primary education is supposed to be covered is utterly inadequate for the purpose.
There is enough justification to universalise free and compulsory education at least for the age group 3-6 as a part of ensuring right to education.
The provision in the Bill on overall surveillance of school education (Section 33) is inadequate.
It provides for the constitution of only “ a National Advisory Council”.
What is needed is a separate statutory commission both at the central and State levels, vested with the power for the over-all monitoring of the implementation of the Bill, reviewing the norms and standards on a periodical basis with a view to improving them.
The provision in the Bill on teachers minimum qualifications (Section 23) is inadequate and non-committal.
It leaves the qualifications of teachers to be laid down by the appropriate authority.
These authorities may very well perpetuate the present system of para-teachers, teachers without training etc.
Prohibition of deployment of Teachers for Non-educational purposes
Teaches would continue to be deployed for “decennial population census, disaster relief duties or duties relating to elections to the local authority or the State Legislature or Parliament, as the case may be”.
There could be a shortage of trained teachers. Approximately 45% of all elementary schools teachers do not have even a Bachelors degree.
The Planning Commission states that the District Institutes of Education and Training (DIETs) “have not justified their existence in terms of outcomes in spite of their existence for over two decades.”