Institutional exclusion in_education_final-libre

i
25% IS OUR RIGHT:
EXAMINING SC/ST EXCLUSION
THROUGH BUDGETS IN SCHOOL
EDUCATION
Dr Jayshree P. Mangubhai
Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion & Swadhikar
New Delhi, 2013

25% IS OUR RIGHT:
EXAMINING SC/ST EXCLUSION THROUGH
BUDGETS IN SCHOOL EDUCATION
Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan and Tribal
Sub Plan by the Centre, Bihar and Jharkhand Governments
Dr Jayshree P. Mangubhai
Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion & Swadhikar
New Delhi, 2013

iii
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to all the Dalit and Adivasi students and civil society organisations that participated in the con-
sultations in Bihar and Jharkhand, and to all government officials who gave some of their time for interviews.
For fieldwork coordination & support:
Annie Namala, Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI), New Delhi
Satyendra Kumar, Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI) State Office, Patna, Bihar
Ghanshyam & Sunil Minj, SAMVAD, Ranchi, Jharkhand
Ganesh Ravi, Ambedkar Samajik Trust, Daltonganj, Palamu district, Jharkhand
Ghanshyam Deen Bandhu, Gaurav Gram Shakti, Bhagalpur, Bihar
Hans Kumar, Sant Kabir Sewa Samiti, Begusarai, Bihar
Pratima Kumari, Gurav Gramin Mahila Vikas Manch, Patna, Bihar
Ravinder Kumar- Jan Adhikaar Kendra, Rohtas, Bihar
Vishnudev Manjhi, Paramount Global Welfare Society, Jamui, BIhar
For data collection:
Annie Namala, CSEI, Delhi
Pankaj Kumar, CSEI, Patna
Sunil Minj, SAMVAD, Ranchi
Vijeta Sinha, CSEI, Patna
For budget data support:
Mohit Jain, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR
For research support:
Abhay Xaxa, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR
Babita Negi, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR
Rajesh Singh, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR
Sanjay Bharti, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR
Tarapada Pradhan, Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan – NCDHR
Bhaswati Borghain, CSEI, Patna
Shabana Ali, CSEI, Patna
Chandrakantha Bharti, CSEI, New Delhi
Research Partners:
Dalit Adivasi Shiksha Vikas Adhikar (SVADHIK)
Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA) - NCDHR
Special thanks to
Indian Institute of Dalit Studies (IIDS), Delhi for anchoring the study.
ChristianAid - IPAP programme for sponsoring this study.

v
Contents
Acknowledgements iii
Introduction 1
Chapter 1 Central Government and School Education 12
Chapter 2 School Education and SCSP/TSP in Bihar and Jharkhand 27
Chapter 3 School Education Planning for SC/ST Children in Bihar and Jharkhand 40
Chapter 4 Conclusions and Recommendations for Fulﬁlling the Right to Education for All
Dalit and Adivasi Children 53
Bibliography 63

1
The Indian government has recognised that the hierarchies of caste, eco-
nomic status and gender characterising Indian society deeply influence chil-
dren’s access to education. It therefore emphasises the significance of social
access in universalising elementary education, which can also be extended
to secondary education. Social access has two key components. One is
equity, which means that all children should have equal access to, in and
through elementary education to realise their potential and aspirations.1
En-
suring equity means not only creating equal opportunities, but also enabling
conditions in which socially excluded children like Dalit and Adivasi children
can avail of the opportunity to receive an education.2
The second is in-
clusion, which means two processes: reducing exclusion from and within
education; and addressing and responding to the diversity of learning needs
among students.3
In other words, inclusion means transforming school sys-
tems and the learning environment in order to respond to the diversity of
learners. Contextualised and flexible strategies therefore have to be devel-
oped based on an understanding of the challenges socially excluded Dalit
and Adivasi children face with regard to access, retention and completion
of school education, including discrimination, and their subsequent needs.4
1 UN Girls’ Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, 2010. Equity and Inclusion in Education. Washington DC: UN Girls’
Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, p.3.
2 Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2010. Report of the Committee on Implementation of he Right of Children to Free & Com-
pulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Resultant Revamp of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. New Delhi: MHRD, para.12.
3 UN Girls’ Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, 2010. Equity and Inclusion in Education. Washington DC: UN Girls’
Education Initiative & EFA Fast Track Initiative, p.3.
4 Ministry of Human Resource Development, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on RtE Act 2009. New Delhi: MHRD,
Ch.3.
Introduction
Social access has two
key components. One
is equity, which means
that all children should
have equal access
to, in and through
elementary education
to realise their potential
and aspirations. The
second is inclusion,
which means two
processes: reducing
exclusion from and
within education;
and addressing and
responding to the
diversity of learning
needs among students.

2
From the 11th
Five Year Plan 2007-12 onwards, focus has fallen on ‘inclusive growth’ as key to ensuring that all In-
dian citizens are able to enjoy socio-economic development as part of the country’s economic progress. The 12th
Five Year Plan 2012-17 emphasises the expansion of education, significantly improving the quality of education
imparted, and ensuring that educational opportunities are available for all. The four main priorities for education
policy continue to be access, equity, quality and governance, while greater emphasis is now placed on improv-
ing learning outcomes at all levels of education. While the Plan claims a significant reduction in socio-economic
inequality in access to education and a narrowing of the gap between SCs/
STs and other social groups in education between 1983 and 2010, it reiterates
that SC/ST students continue to be more likely to drop out of education than
other social groups. Therefore, SC/ST children ‘need greater and focused
attention’.5
All this is in keeping with Article 46 of the Indian Constitution,
which directs the state to take special measures to ensure the educational
development of SCs and STs. It is also in keeping with the National Policy
on Education 1986/1992, which emphasises education as an agent of basic
change in the status of disadvantaged groups like SCs and STs, and focuses
on the equalisation of their education levels with other social groups.
At the same time, public expenditure on education (at all levels of education,
by central and state governments) as a percentage of GDP has seen very little
change over the past 30 years. In 1990-91, it stood at 3.8% of GDP; by 2000-
2001 it was 4.3%; and in 2010-11 it stood at 3.3%.6
This amount, moreover,
may be even less, due to the inclusion of sports, arts and culture in the capital
account expenditure and also due to double accounting on account of state
transfers.7
This low spending pattern exists despite the current government’s commitment under the Common
Minimum Programme to spend 6% of GDP on education. As a percentage of total government expenditure, edu-
cation accounted for 11.6% (as per revised estimates) in 2011-12, or 47.2% of total social services expenditure.8
In the 11th
Plan period, the total expenditure on education by both central and state governments was estimated
at Rs 12,44,797 crores, of which 35% was accounted for by Plan expenditure and 65% by non-Plan expendi-
ture. Further, around 43% of public expenditure on education was for elementary education, 25% for secondary
education and 32% for higher education.9
Inclusive development encompasses progress both in terms of social and financial inclusion. The government
has acknowledged the social and financial exclusion that SCs and STs face, in response to which government
policies should be specifically directed towards the upliftment of these communities in order to enable them to
equally reap the benefits of economic growth.10
Budgets are crucial policy documents that expose the social
and economic priorities of governments. By examining budgets, therefore, one can understand the priorities of
the government and how government commitments towards SCs/STs become concretised. Further, as far as
education is concerned, one core element on which strategies are to be based is ‘innovations and diversity of
approaches in terms of curricula, pedagogies and community engagements in order to respond to the diversity
of learner groups’.11
This demands that the specific needs of SC/ST children be assessed and adequately ad-
dressed through education schemes and budgets. In sum, there is a need to examine how government planning,
legal and policy commitments to ensure the educational development of Dalit and Adivasi children are translated
into reality via education schemes and budgetary allocations and expenditures.
5 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th
Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.50.
6 Jha, Praveen & Parvati, P., 2009. Education for All: Mid-Decade Assessment: he Challenges of Public Finance. New Delhi: NUEPA;
Ministry of Finance, 2011. Economic Survey 2011-12. New Delhi: Government of India.
7 Jha, Praveen & Parvati, P., 2009. Education for All: Mid-Decade Assessment: he Challenges of Public Finance. New Delhi: NUEPA,
p.21.
8 Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2012-13. New Delhi: Government of India, p.271.
Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.47.
10 Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2012-13. New Delhi: Government of India, p.270.
11 Planning Commission, 2012. 12th Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.52.
While the Plan claims a
significant reduction in socio-
economic inequality in access
to education and a narrowing
of the gap between SCs/STs
and other social groups in
education between 1983 and
2010, it reiterates that SC/ST
students continue to be more
likely to drop out of education
than other social groups.
Therefore, SC/ST children
‘need greater and focused
attention’.

3
Status of Dalits and Adivasis in School Education in India
Dalits and Adivasis across the country today constitute two communities that continue to experience social ex-
clusion and discrimination in the education system, which leads to low access, retention and completion rates.
The 12th
Five Year Plan mentions that while the gap in socio-economic inequality in access to education between
SCs/STs and other social groups has reduced over the recent years, SC/ST higher dropout rates and numbers
out of school, as well as lower learning outcomes, remain a concern. Exclusion, therefore, is cited as “the single
most important challenge in universalising elementary education”.12
As per the 2001 Census, the SC literacy rate was 54.7% and ST literacy rate 47.1%, as compared to the overall
literacy rate of 64.8 percent. Gender disparities in literacy were stark: literacy rates ranged from 34.8% for ST
women and 41.9% for SC women, to 59.2% for ST men and 66.6% for SC men. Likewise, rural-urban disparities
were large: literacy rates for SCs were 51.2% in rural areas as compared to 68.1% in urban areas; and literacy
rates for STs were 45.0% in rural areas as compared to 69.1% in urban areas.
While in 2010, the gross enrolment ratio (GER)13
for SC students was 132.0 for Classes 1-5, it dropped to 92.3
in classes 6-8, 70.9 in classes 9-10 and 38.3 in classes 11-12. Similarly, the GER for ST students was 137.0 in
classes 1-5, dropping to 88.9 in classes 6-8, 53.3 in classes 9-10 and 28.8 in classes 11-12. Confirming this
trend of significantly lower enrolments at the higher levels of school education, the dropout rates from classes
1-10 stood at 56.0% for SC students and 70.9% for ST students; i.e. well over half the children were dropping
out before completing their elementary education. This can be compared to the overall dropout rate of 49.3%
from the same classes.14
Accompanying this trend of high dropouts from school education among SC/ST children is their lesser educa-
tional achievements. A NCERT survey conducted in 2012 in 6,602 schools among class 5 students revealed
that SC/ST students consistently underperformed compared to other caste students when tested in reading
comprehension, mathematics and environmental sciences.15
Similarly, in the higher secondary examinations,
SC/ST students continue to perform much lower than students in general. Of
the students who passed the higher secondary education examinations in 2009,
around one-third of SC/ST students (29.8% of SCs and 35.7% of STs) obtained
below 50% marks. Around 30% of SC/ST students (31.9% of SCs and 27.1%
of STs) obtained first division marks as compared to 40.3% for all categories of
students.16
The implications are that many SC and ST students do not achieve
the marks to access higher education. This is especially in central education
institutions like IITs, IIMs, etc., where admissions are now based on competitive
exams as well as aggregate marks in Class 12. All this points to the necessity
of tailoring specific programmes to academically support SC/ST students, espe-
cially the many who come from little or no education backgrounds, to success-
fully complete their schooling.
Behind the educational disparities between SC/ST children and other children are a number of factors. Two im-
portant factors are poverty and discrimination based on caste/ethnicity and gender. The economic status of SCs/
STs continues to lag behind other communities, with a much higher percentage of SCs/STs living below the pov-
erty line as compared to OBCs and Others: the BPL population for SCs was 36-39%, for STs 33-47%, for OBCs
Five Year Plan 2012-2017, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p.50.
13 GER is the ratio of the number of children enrolled in the class group to the total number of children in the corresponding oicial age
group.
14 MHRD, 2012. Selected Educational Statistics 2010-11. New Delhi: Government of India.
15 Mohanty, Basant Kumar, 2012. ‘School survey ties primary scores to caste’. he Telegraph, 13.09.2012.
16 MHRD, 2010. Results of High School and Higher Secondary Examinations, 2009. New Delhi: Government of India.
Two important
factors behind the
educational disparities
between SC/ST children
and other children
are poverty and
discrimination based
on caste/ethnicity
and gender.

4
27-31% and for Others 16% in rural and urban areas.17
This is compounded by multiple forms of exclusionary
and discriminatory practices in schools.
The SSA Framework for Implementation18
has given the broad listing of examples of exclusion of SC children as
follows:
A) Exclusion by Teachers, in terms of segregated seating arrangements; undue harshness in reprimanding
SC children; not giving time and attention to SC children in the classroom, including to answer their ques-
tions; excluding SC children from public functions in the school; making derogatory remarks about SC
children and their academic abilities; denying SC children the use of school facilities; asking SC children to
do menial tasks in school.
B) Exclusion by peer group, in terms of calling SC children by caste names; not including SC children in
games and play activities; not sitting with SC children in the classrooms.
C) Exclusion by the system, in terms of incentives schemes meant for SC children not being implemented
in full; a lack of acknowledgement of SC role models in the curriculum or by teachers; reinforcing caste
characteristics in syllabi and textbooks; lack of sensitisation of teachers in teacher education and training;
insufficient recruitment of SC teachers (para 3.8.2.3).
ST children, besides facing some of the exclusionary practices mentioned above for SC children, also face prob-
lems peculiar to their situation (paras 3.8.2.6 & 3.8.2.8). Tribal populations tend to be concentrated in remote, hilly
or heavily forested areas with dispersed populations where even physical access to schools is difficult. If there are
schools and teachers, the teachers are unlikely to share the students’ social and cultural background or to speak
the students’ language, leading to a sense of alienation among the children. The biggest problem faced by ST
children is that of language: i.e. teaching materials and textbooks tend to be in a language the students do not
understand; content of books and syllabi ignore the students’ own knowledge and experience and focus only on
the dominant language and culture.
Accompanying social exclusion in the field of education is also institutional exclusion in terms of the operation
of schemes, programmes and funds for the educational development of SCs/STs. For example, a 2007 perfor-
mance audit on the educational development of SCs and STs through the Ministry of Social Justice and Empow-
erment and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs education schemes found deficient financial management in terms of:
 under-utilisation of funds
 inter-state imbalances in allocation of funds
 non-availing of central assistance
 delay/non/short release of funds
 unspent balances lying with states/UTs
 diversion of funds.
There were also problems reported in terms of:
 delays in the disbursal of educational entitlements such as scholarships
 shortage or non-delivery of benefits
 inadequate or substandard hostel facilities being provided to these children
 poor awareness of these schemes among SC/ST populations
 failure to monitor and independently review implementation of these educational schemes.19
17 Planning Commission, 2005. NSS 61st round (July 2004 - June 2005). New Delhi: Government of India.
18 MHRD, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. New Delhi: Govern-
ment of India.
19 Comptroller Auditor General, 2007. Performance Audit Report on ‘Educational Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.’
Report no. 14 of 2007. New Delhi: CAG.

5
Why and How of the SCSP and TSP
The Special Component Plan (SCP) for scheduled castes (later renamed as the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan
(SCSP) in 2006) and Tribal Sub Plan (TSP) for scheduled tribes were introduced in 1979-80 and 1974 respectively
with a view to achieving the overall development of Adivasis and Dalits. The government recognised that Adivasis
and Dalits have suffered for many years and continue to suffer social exclusion and economic exploitation. They
have been deprived of access to resources and opportunities, such as the opportunity to become educated. The
result is that they lag behind the rest of the Indian population with regard to all development indicators, includ-
ing (as seen above) education and literacy. The SCSP/TSP thus were designed to channelise the flow of budget
outlays and benefits from the general sector in the Plans of States/UTs and the Central Ministries to the SCs and
STs.20
In order to channelise the flow of funds and benefits, the SCSP and TSP are allocated different codes in the
budget books, namely 789 and 796 respectively. However, only from the 2011-12 budget onwards have the
budget codes for the SCSP and TSP been made mandatory. Before that, the codes were not followed by most
states and, therefore, it was impossible to track the flow of SCSP/TSP funds. These codes appear in the detailed
demands for grants (DDGs) generated by each ministry/department as part of the budget. They break down the
schemes under that ministry/department and the amount allocated for each scheme under SCSP/TSP.
Sector-wise, the largest percentage of SCSP/TSP allocations has been for social services, which includes educa-
tion.
 In 2012-13, the allocation for social services was Rs 23,250.40 crores under SCSP and Rs 11,052.08 crores
under TSP. This amounted to 61.7% of the SCSP funds (total Rs 37,696.35 crores) and 51.3% of the TSP
funds (total Rs 21,544.30 crores).
 In 2013-14, the allocation for social services was Rs 24,717.16 crores under SCSP and Rs 12,632.52 crores
under TSP, or 59.5% of SCSP funds (total Rs 41,561.13 crores) and 51.4% of TSP funds (total Rs 24,594.45
crores).21
While this amount of funding for social services is necessary, a critique is that the bulk of SCSP/TSP funds are
more for social services that are ‘survival in nature’ and not for economic sectors that are ‘developmental in
nature’ and would ensure that Dalits and Adivasis obtain access to productive resources for their long-term de-
velopment and empowerment.22
A core principle of plan budget allocations under SCSP/TSP is that Central Ministries should allocate funds at
least in proportion to the population of SCs and STs in the country – i.e. 16.2% and 8.2% respectively – both in
physical and financial terms.23
As far as the states are concerned, the plan budget allocation under SCSP/TSP
should be at least in proportion to the population of SCs and STs in the state. In addition, the funds allocated
under the SCSP/TSP should be used only for focused strategies, mechanisms and schemes to promote the
overall development of SCs and STs. In this manner, the SCSP/TSP become important mechanisms for the
socio-economic empowerment of Dalits and Adivasis across the country.
Other basic principles are to be followed in allocating funds under the SCSP and TSP include:
20 Note that the Sub-Plans deal only with Plan funding, not non-Plan funding, even though non-Plan funding is generally a larger bud-
get.
21 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget Watch 2012-13 (with note
for Union Budget 2013-14). New Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR. Data compiled from Statements 21 & 21A of Expenditure Budget Vol. 1,
Union Budget 2012-13 and 2013-14.
22 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget Watch 2012-13. New
Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR; Narkar, Amit. 2011. Tribal Sub-Plan under the Eleventh Five Year Plan. Pune: National Centre for Advocacy
Studies.
23 Planning Commission, 2006. Guidelines for Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan. New Delhi: Government of India.

6
 Only those schemes that ensure direct benefits to SC/ST individuals or families, or SC/ST localities with more
than 40% SC/ST populations (under area-wise schemes) should be included under SCSP/TSP.
 These funds should be non-divertible, in that they should not be spent for general schemes that only indi-
rectly benefit SC/STs, nor for schemes that have nothing to do with SC/ST development.
 These funds should be non-lapsable, in that if central/state governments do not spend the funds in that
financial year, they should not be returned as unspent; instead, governments should ensure that those funds
are spent in the next financial year.
 To circumvent the problem of non-divisible nature of funds for certain sectors such as major irrigation, power,
roads, etc., SCSP/TSP funds may account for only around 5% or the actual area being covered or benefitted
by SCs/STs under the project and not the population percentage.
 A dedicated unit for effective functioning can be constituted in every Central Ministry/ Department for the
welfare and development of SCs/STs as a nodal unit for the formulation and implementation of the SCSP/
TSP.24
In this regard, the Prime Minister stated in the 51st
meeting of the National Development Council on 27 June 2005
that “if the benefits of (economic) growth have to reach all sections of our diverse society, there is a need to equip
them with necessary skills and resources to become active participants in growth processes”…. “SCSP and TSP
should be an integral part of annual plans as well as five-year plans, making provision therein non-divertible and
non-lapsable with the clear objective of bridging the gaps in socio-economic conditions of SCs and STs within a
period of 10 years”.
However, while the SCSP/TSP have been operational now for around 33 years, several major problems exist in
their operation:
1. Funds are often not allocated under SCSP/TSP in proportion to the population of SCs/STs in the state/na-
tion. For example, in the current central government budget 2013-14, while the allocations under SCSP and
TSP recorded a slight increase of 0.43% and 0.32% respectively, they are still short of being proportionate
to the population of SCs and STs in the country. The SCSP allocation under the central government budget
of Rs 9931.80 crores amounts to only 9.92% (as compared to SCs’ 16.2% share of the national population)
of the total Plan budget, and the TSP allocation of Rs 5313.52 crores is only 5.87% (as compared to STs’
8.2% share of the national population).
2. A large amount of funds under SCSP and TSP are being allocated for general programmes and schemes,
which are not specifically designed for SCs and STs with fixed, realistic targets. Much of the allocations by
different departments are thus ‘notional’, in that they are made on paper but the money does not reach
SCs and STs. The Planning Commission’s Mid-term Appraisal of the Eleventh Five Year Plan, for example,
noted that only two states – Gujarat and Tamil Nadu – had fixed realistic physical targets for TSP schemes
and programmes, while several states had not conducted surveys to identify the issues and priorities for ST
development in their states.25
3. Most of the schemes devised by different departments for SCs and STs, that are accounted for under the
SCSP and TSP that have direct benefit to SC/ST beneficiaries are merely for survival, not for their develop-
ment or empowerment. In other words, the funds flow mainly for schemes for education, health and poverty
alleviation, and less to schemes that would redistribute resources to SCs and STs and make them also own-
ers of productive and knowledge resources.
4. Critical administrative bottlenecks in the implementation of the development programmes/schemes and
funds allocations, and the absence of adequate monitoring mechanisms, means that much of the funds for
24 See Planning Commission, 2006. Guidelines for Implementation of the Scheduled Castes Sub Plan. New Delhi: Government of India;
Planning Commission, 2010. Taskforce to Review Guidelines on SCSP & TSP by Central Ministries/Departments. New Delhi: Govern-
ment of India.
25 Planning Commission, 2011. Mid Term Appraisal for Eleventh Five Year Plan 2007-2012. New Delhi: Government of India, para
8.67.

7
schemes for SCs and STs do not reach the communities. There is, therefore, poor utilisation of the funds for
the welfare of SCs and STs.
5. SCSP/TSP have been, time and time again, diverted to other sectors and for other purposes.
6. There is a lack of transparency in many state budgets in terms of accessing information on the SCSP/TSP,
to be able to track the funds and how much actually reaches the communities.
7. Scheme planning and budgeting for SCs and STs is devised without the participation of the communities, or
often any needs assessment on the ground. Consequently, as one report noted, “In spite of the number of
schemes and incentives for educational development among STs, the impact has been marginal.”26
8. Service delivery mechanisms are poor and are a major constraint to the attainment of good development
outcomes for SCs and STs.
9. There is a lack of effective monitoring and review mechanisms at the central, state and district levels to en-
sure that all the relevant departments/ministries at both the central and state levels earmark the appropriate
amount of funds under SCSP/TSP and also utilise effectively those funds as per the guidelines framed.27
The Mid Term Appraisal of the 11th
Five Year Plan noted that major issues relating to implementation of
SCSP and TSP strategies include that “priority sectors and need-based schemes/programmes for the benefit
needs based on equity considerations.” (para 8.70)
The 12th
Five Year Plan notes: “Despite the fact that strategies for TSP and SCSP have been in operation
for more than three decades, they could not be implemented as effectively as desired. The expenditure in
many states/UTs was not even 50% of the allocated funds. No proper budget heads/ sub-heads were cre-
ated to prevent diversion of funds. There was no controlling and monitoring mechanism and the planning
and supervision was not as effective as it should be.” (para 24.134)
The Indian National Congress, in its Jaipur meeting in 2013, declared that it is concerned about the insuf-
ficient allocations and utilization under the TSP and SCSP in Central and States budgets. The Party called
upon the Government to consider bringing a national legislation to assure allocation of sufficient resources
to these plans, as has been recently done by the Congress government in Andhra Pradesh. (para 18, Jaipur
Declaration 2013)
The overall impact of these problems in the SCSP/TSP allocations and expenditures is that Adivasis and Dalits are
being denied their due entitlement to funds and schemes to ensure their socio-economic development, including
educational development, on par with the rest of the country’s population. This form of institutionalised exclusion
of Dalits and Adivasis needs to be interrogated in terms of how education policies are being implemented through
the education planning and budget allocation process. As education is a concurrent subject, how the SCSP and
TSP budget allocations are made and implemented at both the central and state levels needs to be specifically
examined. Further, this must be analysed in relation to the perceptions of Dalit and Adivasi school-going children
and their communities as to their education needs and current gaps. This will enable suitable and workable rec-
ommendations to be devised that meet these children’s aspirations in and through education.
Purpose of the Study
 To unpack the education policy and key education programmes/schemes in order to identify patterns of
institutional exclusion in the fulfilment of the right to primary and secondary school education for SC/ST
children.
26 Institute of Social Sciences, 2003. Report on Impact of TSP implementation in Improving the Socio-Economic Condition of the Tribal
People with Special Focus on Reduction of Poverty Levels covering the States of Assam and Tamil Nadu. New Delhi: ISS. p.14.
27 Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan-NCDHR, 2013. Scheduled Caste Sub Plan & Tribal Sub Plan: Union Budget Watch 2012-13. New
Delhi: DAAA-NCDHR, pp.1-2.

8
 To assess the budgetary allocations and utilisation under SCSP and TSP as to their fit with SCSP/TSP man-
dates and the needs and aspirations of SC/ST children and youth in education.
 To devise concrete recommendations to promote equal opportunities in education that is of equitable and
inclusive quality.
Study Objectives
 Map and analyse education budget allocation flows under SCSP and TSP from the central and state govern-
ments, identifying the problems in flow and any budgetary misalignment;
 Assess the types of education schemes for which substantial budgets are allocated in terms of their imple-
mentation and quality: i.e. their ability to address issues of discrimination and exclusion of SC/ST children in
education, as well as meet the educational needs and aspirations of SC/ST children;
 Identify the barriers SC/ST students face in accessing key educational schemes, and the gaps in these
schemes;
 Make concrete policy, budget and programme recommendations to the central and state governments to
enhance the quality and effective delivery of funds and schemes to promote SC/ST children’s access to
school education, and develop a package of entitlements for SC/ST children to ensure their access, reten-
tion and completion of school education.
Scope of Study
The study covered the school education budgets of the central government (Ministry of Human Resource Devel-
opment) and state governments (State Departments for School Education) in Bihar and Jharkhand. The primary
focus for budget analysis is the budget year 2011-12, given that this is the latest year for which complete data
on the budget estimates, revised estimates and actual expenditures is available. At the same time, the budget
estimates and revised estimates for the budget year 2012-13, and budget estimates for the year 2013-14, are
also analysed. The process of annual school education planning is also analysed in order to understand how
schemes and funds are devised and allocated (or not) to ensure direct educational benefits for SC/ST students.
Bihar and Jharkhand were chosen due to the fact that Bihar has the third largest SC population in the country
(13,048,608 SCs as per 2001 Census), and Jharkhand the sixth largest ST population (7,087,068 STs as per
2001 Census). This allowed a comparison between a largely SC populated state and largely ST populated state
in terms of school education budgeting and provisioning. At the same time, how budgets and schemes are be-
ing implemented for the minority SC and ST populations in those respective states (758,351 STs in Bihar and
3,189,320 SCs in Jharkhand, as per 2001 Census) was also examined. Bihar and Jharkhand, both educationally
backward states with some of the highest numbers of out-of-school children in the country, also report very low
education levels among SCs and STs (much lower than the average levels in the state), which implies the urgent
need for special measures to ensure these children enjoy their right to education.
The study also focuses specifically on three key government schemes – Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA), Rashtriya
Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) and Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) – due to their allocation of a sizeable
proportion of funds under the SCSP/TSP for promoting SC/ST children’s access to school education. SSA and
RMSA are also today the primary schemes through which the government aims to ensure elementary and sec-
ondary education to all children. Moreover, SSA and RMSA both include planning stipulations on how to bridge
gender and social category gaps in elementary and high school education respectively, while NVS operates a
quota system that ensures access to SC/ST students. These three government schemes are unpacked and
tracked financially at the national and state levels.

9
Study Methodology
SECONDARY DATA
1. Secondary data and research on education budgeting for children in general, education planning and audit-
ing, state SC/ST schemes, and the status of school education for SC/ST children was examined, in order to
understand the general trends in the education system and its ability to cater to the needs of SC/ST children.
2. The education budget allocations (estimates), revised estimates and actual (expenditure) for the financial year
2011-12 for primary/secondary school education in general and under the SCSP and TSP at the MHRD and
state government levels were collected and analysed, alongside the budget estimates and revised estimates
for 2012-13, and the budget estimates for 2013-14. An assessment was then made of the breakdown of
the education budget in terms of the proportion of funds going to direct schemes (scholarships, textbooks,
etc.) that generate concrete benefits in hand for SC/ST children, to grants in aid to institutions (for school
maintenance, upgrading of facilities, salaries of non-permanent staff, etc.) and to the creation of capital as-
sets (classrooms, toilets, new school buildings, etc.).
3. Secondary data and research on the three key education schemes – SSA, RMSA and NVS – were examined
to understand how these schemes are designed, for what priorities funds are allocated, the mechanisms for
their implementation and the fund flow to these schemes at the central and state government levels.
PRIMARY DATA
Primary data collection was carried out in Bihar by the state office of Centre for Social Equity and Inclusion (CSEI),
and in Jharkhand by both SAMVAD Jharkhand and CSEI Bihar staff over the period of March-April 2013.
4. Taking the base as the national/state education budgets, interviews were held with key state education of-
ficials – Education Department, SSA, RMSA and NVS officials – in Bihar and Jharkhand to understand the
education planning and budgeting process at the state level, how the SCP/TSP funds for education are al-
located and accounted for under different education-related schemes (SSA, RMSA and NVS in particular),
how schemes are devised for SC/ST children in the state, and how funds are disbursed to the district and
school levels. The interviews also assessed the level of understanding of the SCSP/TSP budgets, as well as
the constraints and barriers that hinder these funds being of direct benefit to SC/ST school-going children.
5. Further, two districts were chosen in each state – one having a sizeable SC population and one having a size-
able ST population – and as much as possible the same officials met at the district level to also understand
the district-level education planning and budgeting process in general, and under SSA, RMSA and NVS
schemes.
a. Nalanda district in Bihar was chosen on the basis of it being Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s home
district, it being a district noted for its strong governance, including e-governance, and it being a
district where the Chief Minister has piloted a number of government schemes. The district has
had a lot of fund pumped into it as a result, and it also has a large population of SC/STs: as per
the 2001 Census, SCs are 20% of the district population, while STs are 0.04%. In terms of literacy
rates, both SC and ST literacy rates are fall below those of the general population: 42.0% for SC
men, 15.4% for SC women, 39.3% for ST men, 18.2% for ST women, as compared to 66.4% for
men in general and 38.6% for women in general.
b. Jamui district in Bihar was chosen on the basis of it being one of the districts with the highest
concentration of ST population (4.8% of district population as per 2001 Census). Jamui also has
a fairly high concentration of SC population (17.4% of district population) and has strong pres-
ence and network of Dalit civil society organisations who have been working with the community
for a long period, including in the arena of education. In terms of literacy rates, both SC and ST
literacy rates are fall below those of the general population: 35.4% for SC men, 12.8% for SC

10
women, 39.5% for ST men, 13.0% for ST women, as compared to 57.1% for men in general and
26.3% for women in general.
c. Ranchi district in Jharkhand was chosen due to its high concentration of ST population: 41.8%
as per the 2001 Census. SCs are only 5.2% of the district’s population, by contrast. As it is the
district containing the state capital, education institutions and funding for the district are high.
d. Palamu district in Jharkhand was chosen due to its high concentration of SC population:
27.6%, as per the 2001 census. STs are only 9.0% of the district’s population, by contrast.
6. Dalit and Adivasi students in the two chosen districts per state were also met for a one-day consultation
each (total 4 consultations). The groups were chosen on the basis of existing networks and school contacts
the coordinating organisations in each state had formed with SC/ST students in the districts. Care was taken
to ensure adequate representation of both SC/ST communities, as well as sub-caste/tribal and gender rep-
resentation within the two communities. The consultations focused on understanding the key barriers SC/
ST children face in accessing and enjoying quality school education up to 12th class, the current gaps in
education schemes meant for their direct benefit, and the types of educational needs and aspirations they
have, for which scheme matching is required.
7. A state-level consultation was held in both Patna and Ranchi with Dalit and Adivasi-led civil society organi-
sations working on the right to education (total 2 consultations). The main purpose was to understand the
barriers and constraints SC/ST children face in accessing and enjoying quality school education up to 12th
class at both the district levels and overall state level, the current gaps in education schemes meant for their
direct benefit, and the possible interventions and schemes that could be devised to ensure SC/ST children’s
right to education.
Data Analysis and Organisation of the Report
The central and state education budget outlays to SCSP and TSP were compiled into tables from the budget
books for the years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14. The interviews with government officials and the consul-
tations with SC/ST students and civil society organisations were manually coded, and then broader analytical
categories developed under which to group the data for analysis. Information from the interviews broadly fell
into three main categories: on the education planning process in general at both the state and district levels;
on SCSP/TSP allocations in particular; and on the process of devising education schemes for SC/ST children.
From the consultations, the information was categorised in terms of awareness of the SCSP/TSP; educational
constraints barriers for SC/ST children in the states; gaps in current education schemes; and a charter of de-
mands that expressed the aspirations and needs of SC/ST children in order to be able to successfully access
and complete their school education.
The report is then organised into five sections:
The Introduction provides a broad overview of the educational status of SC/ST children in the country today, the
current education planning thrust, and the SCSP/TSP and its implementation so far. This makes the case for an
urgent need to focus on education budgeting and planning for SC/ST children. The purpose, objectives, scope
and methodology adopted for the study are then detailed.
Chapter 1 analyses the central government allocations and expenditure under the SCSP/TSP for school edu-
cation, with a particular focus on SSA, RMSA and NVS schemes.
Chapter 2 examines the status of school education for SC/ST students in Bihar and Jharkhand, as well as al-
locations and expenditures under the SCSP/TSP in those states.
Chapter 3 examines the education planning process in Bihar and Jharkhand at both the district and state
levels, especially with respect to SCSP/TSP. An assessment is made of the key education schemes
meant for SC/STs as well as SSA, RMSA and NVS, highlighting the gaps from the perspective of

11
Dalit and Adivasi students and civil society organisations. This assessment is linked to a needs
analysis for these students to successfully access and complete school education.
Chapter 4 then presents the overall conclusions in terms of the current gaps in budgets, planning and schemes,
and recommendations in terms of policy changes as well as a basket of schemes that would ensure
direct beneﬁts reach SC/ST students in order to fulﬁl their right to education.

12
Education is a concurrent subject and, therefore, both central and state/union territory governments have obliga-
tions to ensure the right to education for all children within their jurisdictions. Education is also a signiﬁcant sector
of expenditure by the Government of India under the SCSP/TSP: in fact, the Ministry of Human Resource Devel-
opment (MHRD) allocations for the SCSP/TSP are the largest of all Ministries, and amount to around 30% of all
Union Budget allocations under SCSP/TSP. The Department of School Education and Literacy (DSEL), MHRD is
the key department in charge of promoting and developing school education at the central government level. Its
vision, as per its Citizen’s Charter, is to ensure education of equitable quality for all in order to fully harness the na-
tion’s human potential. Speciﬁcally, DSEL aims to provide free and compulsory quality education to all children at
elementary level, as envisaged under the Right of All Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009, and
to universalise opportunities for quality secondary education. DSEL implements a number of central and centrally
sponsored schemes for school education, of which three major schemes with large budget allocations are dealt
with in detail below. The DSEL budget estimate for 2013-14 runs to Rs 49,659 crores, Rs 6930 crores more than
the revised estimate of Rs 42,729 crores for 2012-13.28
This chapter presents an analysis of the overall DSEL budget as well as the three schemes in terms of the alloca-
tions and expenditures made under the SCSP/TSP and their contribution to ensuring that SC/ST children enjoy
their right to school education.
28 Ministry of Finance, 2013. Statement 12, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Union Budget 2013-14. New Delhi: Government of India.
Central Government
and School Education
CHAPTER 1

13
1.1 SCSP and TSP under the Department of School
Education and Literacy
As mentioned in the previous chapter, the Planning Commission policy guidelines for the implementation of the
SCSP/TSP mandate the following: population-proportionate funding allocations under the SCSP (16.2%) and
TSP (8.2%); only those schemes that directly benefit SC/ST individuals or households or SC/ST localities to
be categorised under SCSP/TSP and only expenditures commensurate with the benefits accrued to SCs/STs
booked there under; and these funds to be non-divertible and non-lapsable. The Narendra Jadhav Committee
Report additionally recommended that a nodal unit be set up in all ministries/departments that have an obligation
to earmark funds under the SCSP/TSP; and the Central Tripartite Committee created in 1999 (and reconstituted
in 2006) be fully activated to regularly review the implementation of the SCSP/TSP, identify specific schemes that
would benefit SCs/STs, and to promptly resolve any inter-ministerial issues.29
The Narendra Jadhav Committee Report divided central government ministries into four categories according to
their function and accordingly stipulated the acceptable percentage allocations under SCSP/TSP. For Ministries/
Departments such as the Department of School Education and Literacy, which are implementing social sector
programmes/schemes of major relevance for the development of SCs/STs, they may be required to earmark
more than 16.2% of their plan outlay under SCSP and 8.2% under TSP. In terms of allocations under the SCSP/
TSP, the Department of School Education and Literacy, MHRD has consistently allocated more than the afore-
mentioned percentages for school education (see Table 2.1). Its allocations, moreover, have increased over the
past three budget periods, though the increase has been much less over the 2012-13 to 2013-14 period than
over the 2011-12 to 2012-13 period: SCSP allocations increased by Rs 1402.4 crores between 2011-12 and
2012-13, but only by Rs 738.0 crores between 2012-13 and 2013-14; TSP allocations likewise increased by Rs
750.3 crores between 2011-12 and 2012-13, but only by Rs 394.8 crores between 2012-13 and 2013-14. At the
same time, the percentage share of SCSP/TSP funds to the total Plan outlay by the Department has increased
between the 2011-12 and 2013-14 budgets to stand at 20.14% for SCSP and 11.64% for TSP.
Table 2.1 | Department of School Education and Literacy Allocations under SCSP/TSP
Sub Plan
Allocation 2011-12 (BE) + %
allocation to total DSEL Plan
Outlay
Outlay
Outlay
SCSP
7791.40
(20.00%)
9193.80
(20.00%)
9931.80
(20.14%)
TSP
4168.40
(10.70%)
4918.68
(9.61% )
5313.52
(11.64%)
Source: SCSP/TSP allocations as per statements 21 and 21A, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14
Currently, however, there is no nodal officer appointed to the Department of School Education and Literacy to
oversee the allocations and expenditures under the SCSP/TSP. This means that there is no institutional mecha-
nism in place to plan, coordinate and monitor the implementation of programmes for SC/ST children within
school education schemes and to book only expenditures for such programmes under the SCSP/TSP. There is
also a lack of periodic review on the SCSP/TSP performance in terms of positive educational impacts on SC/ST
children.
Moreover, the large allocations under the SCSP/TSP for school education are offset when examining the break-
down of those allocations under specific education schemes. Tables 2.2 and 2.3 present the breakdown of the
Department of School Education and Literacy budgetary allocations under SCSP and TSP respectively for the
years 2011-12 to 2013-14. The data reveals that in 2011-12, 27 education schemes were allocated funds under
the SCSP and TSP. Of these, two schemes clearly targeted (Religious) Minority children and one was for an Indo-
29 Planning Commission, 2010. Taskforce to Review Guidelines on SCSP & TSP by Central Ministries/Departments. New Delhi: Govern-
ment of India.

14
Mongolian school, and therefore should not have been allocated funds under SCSP/TSP in the first place. At least
no expenditure was incurred under SCSP/TSP for these three schemes that year, and thereafter no funds have
been allocated to them under SCSP/TSP.
Further, in 2011-12, the actual expenditure accounted for as a percentage of the Revised Budget estimates for
that year under SCSP was 91.6% and under TSP 98.4%: i.e. the budgeted funds were not fully utilised, though
over 90% of funds under SCSP/TSP were accounted for as spent during that financial year. This should be seen
in light of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, which highlighted that the
unspent balances means that the targeted beneficiaries are not being covered fully and non-adherence to finan-
cial norms is taking place. Moreover, the committee noted that in view of the high dropout rates especially among
SC/ST students, the Department should come out with a specific action plan to curb the problem.30
The main concern when viewing SCSP/TSP allocations and expenditures for school education, however, is that
there is no mechanism currently in place to ensure that funds allocated under these schemes are spent for the
direct benefit of SC/ST students. For example, critiques have been made of the education outlays under SSA
and the Midday Meals for Elementary Schools schemes, which represent the two highest budgetary allocations
under the SCSP/TSP, that the funds are for students in general and not specific for SC/ST students. SSA does
not contain any programmes specifically to ensure SC/ST student school admissions or the recruitment of SC/
ST teachers. Similarly, the Midday Meals for Elementary Schools scheme does not have any mechanism to indi-
cate how these funds will be spent directly for SC/ST students.31
The same can be said for the RMSA scheme,
which records the third highest allocation under SCSP/TSP, but without any specific programmes targeting SC/
ST children (see section 1.3).
Table 2.2 | Department of School Education & Literacy Allocations under SCSP (in Rs crore)
S. No. Scheme
BE *
2011-12
RE **
2011-12
AE #
2011-12
BE
2012-13
RE
2012-13
BE
2013-14
1 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) 4200.00 4200.00 3920.48 5111.00 4728.78 5451.60
2
National Programme of Nutrition Sup-
port to Primary Education (Midday
Meal Scheme)
2076.00 2076.00 1781.10 2387.40 2301.57 2643.00
3
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan
(RMSA)
484.78 484.78 512.26 624.80 625.80 796.60
4 Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) 240.00 240.00 240.00 250.00 250.00 250.00
5
Scheme for setting up of 6000 Model
Schools at Block level as Benchmark
of Excellence
240.00 240.00 216.34 216.00 161.34 200.00
6
Strengthening of Teacher Training
Institutions
100.00 75.31 68.42 100.00 58.40 100.00
7
Information and Communication Tech-
nology in Schools
100.00 100.00 98.26 70.00 70.00 70.00
8
Adult Education & Skill Development
Scheme
97.70 97.70 94.16 118.40 84.30 114.40
9 Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 70.00
10
Scheme for construction and running
of Girls Hostels for Secondary and
Higher Secondary School students
50.00 50.00 0.02 89.44 60.40 90.00
11
Support to NGOs/Institutions/SRCs for
20.00 20.00 19.16 21.00 16.09 20.00
30 Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. ‘244th
Report on Demands for
Grants 2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy’. Presented to Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok
Sabha on 03.05.2012, paras 2.10 & 3.25.
31 Menon, Sreelatha, 2013. ‘SC/ST funds increase, but Plan yet to reach Beneiciaries’. he Business Standard, 02.03.2013.

15
S. No. Scheme
BE *
2011-12
RE **
2011-12
AE #
2011-12
BE
2012-13
RE
2012-13
BE
2013-14
12
Inclusive Education for the Disabled at
Secondary Schools
20.00 20.00 8.92 14.00 5.61 10.00
13
National Means-cum-Merit Scholarship
Scheme
12.00 14.00 12.06 14.00 14.00 14.00
14 Mahila Samakhya 10.00 10.00 10.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
15
National Scheme for Incentive to Girl
Child for Secondary School
10.00 68.69 68.69 67.00 67.00 66.20
16 Vocationalisation of Education 5.00 5.00 2.66 20.00 16.00 16.02
17
National Council of Educational Re-
search & Training
5.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 2.34 5.00
18 National Bal Bhawan 2.80 2.80 0.80 2.80 1.09 1.60
19 Directorate of Adult Education 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.80 0.68 1.80
20
Centrally Sponsored Scheme of ap-
pointment of Language Teachers
1.00 1.00 0.99 1.16 0.38 1.16
21 National Institute of Open Schooling 3.00 3.00 0.70 -- -- 0.02
22 National Literacy Mission Authority 0.40 0.40 0.00 -- -- 0.40
23
Central Tibetan School Society Admin-
istration
1.60 1.60 1.43 -- -- --
24
Access and Equity - Grants to Volun-
tary Organisations
0.02 0.02 0.02 -- -- --
25
Scheme for Providing Quality Educa-
tion in Madarsa (SPQEM)
30.00 3.00 -- -- -- --
26
Scheme for Infrastructure Develop-
ment in Minority Institutions (IDMI)
10.00 1.00 -- -- -- --
27
Joint Indo-Mongolian School (Mon-
golia)
0.20 0.20 -- -- -- --
SUB-TOTAL 7791.40 7791.40 7133.37 9193.80 8545.80 9931.80
* BE = budget estimates ** RE = revised estimates # AE = actual expenditure
Source: Statement 21, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, 2012-13 and 2013-14: Demand No. 58 (2012-13)/59 (2013-14).
Table 2.3 | Department of School Education & Literacy Allocations under TSP (in Rs crore)
S.
No. Scheme
BE *
2011-12
RE **
2011-12
AE #
2011-12
BE
2012-13
RE
2012-13
BE
2013-14
1 Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) 2247.20 2247.00 2246.72 2744.93 2539.64 2916.61
2
National Programme of Nutrition
Support to Primary Education (Mid-
day Meal Scheme)
1110.63 1110.66 1069.83 1277.26 1230.50 1417.23
3
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhi-
yan (RMSA)
259.36 257.95 273.73 334.27 342.81 426.18
4 Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) 128.40 128.40 128.40 133.75 133.75 133.75
5
Scheme for setting up of 6000 Model
Schools at Block level as Benchmark
of Excellence
128.40 128.40 109.11 115.56 80.25 107.00
6
Strengthening of Teacher Training
Institutions
53.50 37.39 35.79 53.50 31.25 75.00
7
Information and Communication
Technology in Schools
53.50 53.50 53.32 37.45 37.45 37.45
8
Scheme
52.27 52.27 50.35 63.34 44.79 61.20
9 Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan 37.45 37.45 37.45 37.45 37.45 37.45

16
10
Scheme for construction and running
of Girls Hostels for Secondary and
Higher Secondary School students
26.75 26.75 21.51 48.15 32.31 48.15
11
Support to NGOs/Institutions/SRCs
for Adult Education & Skill Develop-
ment
10.70 10.70 10.35 11.24 8.61 10.70
12
Inclusive Education for the Disabled
at Secondary Schools
10.70 10.70 5.19 7.49 3.00 5.35
13
National Means-cum-Merit Scholar-
ship Scheme
6.42 7.49 4.98 7.49 7.49 7.49
14
National Scheme for Incentive to Girl
Child for Secondary School
5.35 43.17 43.17 25.00 25.00 10.70
15 Mahila Samakhya 5.35 5.35 5.35 6.42 6.42 6.42
16 Vocationalisation of Education 2.68 2.68 0.02 10.70 8.56 8.57
17
National Council of Educational Re-
search & Training
2.68 2.68 2.68 1.61 1.25 1.61
18 National Institute of Open Schooling 1.61 1.61 0.38 -- -- 0.01
19 National Bal Bhawan 1.50 1.50 0.50 1.50 0.58 0.86
20 Directorate of Adult Education 1.02 1.02 1.03 0.96 0.68 0.96
21
Centrally Sponsored Scheme of ap-
pointment of Language Teachers
0.54 0.54 0.53 0.61 0.21 0.62
22 National Literacy Mission Authority 0.21 0.21 -- -- -- 0.21
23
Access and Equity - Grants to Volun-
tary Organisations
0.01 0.01 0.01 -- -- --
24
Central Tibetan School Society Ad-
ministration
0.86 0.86 0.76 -- -- --
25
Scheme for Providing Quality Educa-
tion in Madarsa (SPQEM)
16.05 -- -- -- -- --
26
Scheme for Infrastructure Develop-
ment in Minority Institutions (IDMI)
5.35 -- -- -- -- --
27
Joint Indo-Mongolian School (Mon-
golia)
0.11 0.11 -- -- -- --
SUB-TOTAL 4168.40 4168.40 4101.16 4918.68 4572.00 5313.52
* BE = budget estimates ** RE = revised estimates # AE = actual expenditure
Source: Statement 21, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, 2012-13 and 2013-14: Demand No. 58 (2012-13)/59 (2013-14).
Furthermore, the nature of allocations under the various schemes of the Department of School Education and
Literacy are mostly ‘notional’, in that a proportion of the total scheme meant for the general school student or
child population is presumed to be utilised for the benefit of SC/ST children. Funds thus are accounted for under
SCSP/TSP as a technical calculation of a percentage of the total funds spent on the schemes. However, within
each scheme there is no specific component or programme that would ensure that direct benefits flow to SC/ST
children for their education and that they enjoy such benefit in both physical and financial terms. This has been
openly acknowledged by the MHRD, which notes that its schemes operate primarily along the following lines:
general schemes for all children/students; or area-based schemes which focus on areas with major concentration
of SC/ST populations. In other words, little or no schemes exist that are exclusively meant for SCs/STs.32
This can be illustrated by examining the object-wise breakdown of SCSP/TSP allocations, which are based on
the Detailed Demands for Grants (Tables 2.4 & 2.5). Note that the allocations as per Statements 21 and 21A
under SCSP and TSP respectively sometimes differ from the amounts calculated based on the Detailed Demands
for Grant (DDG) of the Department of School Education and Literacy.
32 MHRD, 2012. ‘Agenda Items for Meeting of Sub-Committee for Drafting of Guidelines for Implementation of SCSP and TSP in
Higher Education and School Education Sectors’. Meeting held on 12.09.2012 in ICSSR, New Delhi.

17
The breakdown of SCSP/TSP allocations by the Department of School Education and Literacy shows a dis-
proportionate allocation for grants-in-aid for the creation of capital assets and general grants. Taking the year
2012-13 budget estimates, 29.2% of funds allocated under the SCSP and 21.3% of funds under the TSP were
for the creation of capital assets like school infrastructure, where it is not possible to divide the accounts for funds
spent that directly benefit SC/ST students and funds spent that benefit other students. A further 59.7% of SCSP
funds and 77.5% of TSP funds were for grants-in-aid general, which does not indicate how much of these funds
would have been utilised for programmes with direct benefits to SC/ST children. Less than 1% of funds – 0.2%
of SCSP funds and 0.2% of TSP funds – were for the direct benefits of scholarships and stipends for SC/ST stu-
dents. A similar situation prevails in 2013-14, where 22.0% of SCSP and TSP funds were grants for the creation
of capital assets, 76.9% of SCSP funds and 77.0% of TSP funds for general grants-in-aid, and only 0.01% of
SCSP and TSP funds for direct entitlements such as scholarships and stipends for SC/ST children. In sum, there
is no evidence of clear financial and programme planning to address the obstacles and needs of SC/ST children
in school education.
Table 2.4 | Object-wise Details of SCSP Allocations under Dept of School Education and Literacy
(in Rs crore)
Object Head Details 2012-13 BE 2012-13 RE 2013-14 BE
Grants-in-aid-General 6406.60 5885.80 7640.17
Grants for Creation of Capital Assets 2684.39 2558.31 2188.42
Grants-in-aid-Salaries 87.01 87.01 87.01
Scholarship/Stipends 14.00 14.00 14.00
Advertising & Publicity 1.28 0.68 1.28
Other Administrative Expenses 0.52 0.00 0.92
Total 9193.80 8545.80 9931.80
Table 2.5 | Object-wise Details of TSP Allocations under Dept of School Education and Literacy (in
Rs crore)
Object Head Details (TSP) 2012-13 BE 2012-13 RE 2013-14 BE
Grants-in-aid-General 3425.63 3085.57 4089.63
Grants for creation of Capital Assets 1441.10 1434.75 1171.72
Grants-in-aid-Salaries 43.51 43.51 43.51
Scholarship/Stipends 7.49 7.49 7.49
Advertising & Publicity 0.68 0.68 0.68
Other Administrative Expenses 0.28 0.00 0.49
Total 4918.69 4572.00 5313.52
In addition, on examination of the types of schemes under the Department of School Education and Literacy
and their various allocations (Tables 2.6 & 2.7), the following broad categorisation can be made between general
schemes meant for all children, and schemes directly targeting SC/ST children. The general schemes amount to
a notional allocation of funds under SCSP/TSP, since there is no mechanism to ensure that specific funds and
benefits flow directly to SC/ST children. Only for those directly targeting SC/ST children can there be said to be
a real allocation of funds under SCSP/TSP. A Planning Commission Task Group on the Development of SCs/STs
has actually confirmed this trend as far as education is concerned:
A Special Component Plan with the notional allocation of 15% is being implemented for the welfare of
scheduled castes and a Tribal Sub Plan with a notional allocation of 7.5% of the total allocation of all
schemes is being implemented for the welfare of scheduled tribes. There are no exclusive schemes for
scheduled castes and scheduled tribes even though preferences/ concessions are given to scheduled
castes and scheduled tribes under different schemes.33
33 Planning Commission, 2005. Report of Task Group on Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes on Selected Agenda Items of
the National Common Minimum Programme. New Delhi: Planning Commission, para 3.1.3.

18
Taking this categorisation and applying it to the 2012-13 budget outlays under SCSP/TSP, the result is that only
an estimated 1.5% of the Department’s SCSP budget and 0.4% of its TSP budget actually ﬂows to SC/ST chil-
dren for their education under targeted schemes.
Table 2.6 | Department of School Education and Literacy Breakdown of SCSP Allocations 2012-13
Name and Details of Scheme
Allocation for
Total Scheme
Total SCSP
as per DDGs
%
Notional
Allocation
General
Allocation
Real
Allocation
Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 25555.00 4934.64 19.31 0.00 4934.64 0.00
Elementary Education - Na-
tional Programme of Mid Day
Meals in Schools
11937.00 2221.00 18.61 0.00 2221.00 0.00
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha
Abhiyan
3124.00 624.80 19.68 0.00 624.80 0.00
Elementary Education - Other
Expenditure
23114.47 342.76 0.03 0.00 342.76 0.00
Navodaya Vidyalayas Samiti 1250.00 250.00 18.61 0.00 250.00 0.00
Scheme for Setting up of 6000
Model Schools at Block Level
as Bench Mark of Excellence
1080.00 216.00 18.00 0.00 216.00 0.00
Adult Education & Skill Devel-
opment Scheme
531.00 119.45 21.19 0.00 119.45 0.00
Elementary Education - Teach-
ers Training
450.00 100.00 22.22 0.00 100.00 0.00
Scheme for Construction and
Running of Girls Hostels
for Students of Secondary &
Higher Secondary Schools
450.00 89.44 19.88 16.54 0.00 72.90
National Scheme for Incentive
to the Girl Child for Secondary
(SUCCESS)
100.00 67.00 67.00 0.00 0.00 67.00
Information & Communication
Technologies in Schools
350.00 70.00 18.57 0.00 70.00 0.00
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan 350.00 70.00 18.44 70.00 0.00 0.00
Support to NGOs/ Institutions/
SRCs for Adult Education &
Skill Development
105.00 19.95 19.00 0.00 19.95 0.00
Vocationalisation of Education 100.00 19.40 19.40 0.00 19.40 0.00
Inclusive Education for the
Disabled at Secondary Schools
(IEDSS)
70.00 14.00 20.00 0.00 14.00 0.00
National Means cum Merit
Scholarship Scheme
70.00 14.00 20.00 0.00 14.00 0.00
Mahila Samakhya 60.00 12.00 20.00 0.00 12.00 0.00
National Council of Education
Research and Training
13.50 3.00 22.22 3.00 0.00 0.00
National Bal Bhawan National
Children’s Museum Bal Bhawan
Society
14.00 2.80 20.00 2.80 0.00 0.00
Directorate of Adult Education 9.00 1.80 18.00 1.80 0.00 0.00
Appointment of Language
Teachers
5.80 1.16 20.00 1.16 0.00 0.00
Evaluation and Studies Appren-
tices Act Teacher Training
0.00 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00
Total 68756.47 9193.80 440.12 95.90 8958.00 139.90
Source: Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA)-NCDHR budget analysis 2012-13

19
Table 2.7 | Department of School Education and Literacy Breakdown of TSP Allocations 2012-13
Name and Details of Scheme
Allocation for
Total Scheme
Total TSP
as per DDGs
%
Notional
Allocation
General
Allocation
Real
Allocation
Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 25555.00 1489.12 5.83 0.00 1489.12 0.00
Elementary Education -
National Programme of Mid
Day Meals in Schools
11937.00 1149.53 9.63 0.00 1149.53 0.00
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shik-
sha Abhiyan
3124.00 288.46 9.23 288.46 0.00 0.00
Navodaya Vidyalayas Samiti 1250.00 114.40 9.15 0.00 114.40 0.00
Scheme for Setting up of
6000 Model Schools at
Block Level as Bench Mark
of Excellence
1080.00 104.13 9.64 0.00 104.13 0.00
Teachers Training
450.00 53.50 11.89 0.00 53.50 0.00
Other Expenditure
0.00 883.54 0.00 0.00 883.54 0.00
Secondary Education - As-
sistance to Non-Govern-
ment Secondary Schools
(Amount of this scheme
is already added in other
scheme)
0.00 81.29 0.00 0.00 81.29 0.00
Secondary Education -
Other Grants
0.00 58.12 0.00 0.00 58.12 0.00
Adult Education & Skill
Development Scheme
531.00 51.54 9.71 0.00 51.54 0.00
Secondary Education - Re-
search and Training
0.00 35.17 0.00 0.00 35.17 0.00
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanga-
than
350.00 32.75 9.36 32.75 0.00 0.00
National Scheme for Incen-
tive to the Girl Child for
Secondary (SUCCESS)
100.00 19.00 19.00 0.00 0.00 19.00
Adult Education - Other
Adult Education Pro-
gramme
0.00 13.90 0.00 0.00 13.90 0.00
Other Expenditure
0.00 13.85 0.00 0.00 13.85 0.00
Support to NGOs/ Institu-
tions/SRCs for Adult Educa-
tion & Skill Development
105.00 9.14 8.70 0.00 9.14 0.00
Mahila Samakhya 60.00 6.42 10.70 0.00 6.42 0.00
National Means cum Merit
Scholarship Scheme
70.00 4.00 5.71 0.00 4.00 0.00
Scholarships
0.00 3.49 0.00 0.00 3.49 0.00
Information & Commu-
nication Technologies in
Schools
350.00 2.67 0.76 0.00 2.67 0.00
National Bal Bhawan Na-
tional Children’s Museum
Bal Bhawan Society
14.00 1.50 10.71 0.00 1.50 0.00
Directorate of Adult Educa-
tion
9.00 0.87 9.67 0.87 0.00 0.00

20
Vocationalisation of Educa-
tion
100.00 0.64 0.64 0.00 0.64 0.00
Equipment- Secondary
Education
0.00 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.00
Scheme for Providing Quality
Education in Madrassas
13.50 0.36 2.67 0.00 0.36 0.00
Information & Communication
Technology in Schools - Grants
to Union Territories Without
Legislature
0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00
Evaluation and Studies Appren-
tices Act Teacher Training
0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00
Adult Education - Direction &
Administration
0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00
Scheme for Construction and
Running of Girls Hostels for
Students of Secondary & Higher
Secondary Schools
450.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02
Inclusive Education for the
Disabled at Secondary Schools
(IEDSS)
70.00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00
Appointment of Language
Teachers
5.80 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.01 0.00
Total 45642.00 4418.69 143.21 322.08 4077.59 19.02
Source: Dalit Arthik Adhikar Andolan (DAAA)-NCDHR budget analysis 2012-13
This finding of notional allocations is further confirmed by the right to information replies34
received from the
Department of School Education and Literacy, MHRD in 2011 and 2012 under the following schemes: RMSA,
National Programme of Midday Meals in Schools, Inclusive Education for the Disabled at Secondary Stage,
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Jan Shikshan Sansthans and Saakshar Bharat. Most of
these replies point out to allocations of funds under the SCSP/TSP but without any attempt to justify any specific
activities under these schemes to benefit SC/ST students. For example, the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan reply
mentions the findings allocation under SCSP and TSP, and notes that “the allocated amount is being utilised for
construction activities and computerisation and the SC/ST category students are benefitted by these facilities
altogether”.
The absence of targeted schemes for SC/ST children is partly the result of education schemes for SC/ST children
being separately dealt with under the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment (for SCs) and Ministry of Tribal
Affairs (for STs). For example, in 2013-14 the MSJE allocated a total of Rs 961.85 crores for SC children’s educa-
tion through the following targeted schemes: post-matric scholarship for SCs; girls hostel for SCs; boys hostel for
SCs; pre-matric scholarship for children of those engaged in certain (unclean) occupations; upgradation of merit
of SC students; and pre-matric scholarship for SCs. Likewise, in 2013-14 the MTA allocated Rs 1202.19 crores
for ST children’s education through the following targeted schemes: PMS, book bank and upgradation of merit
for ST students; hostels for ST boys and girls; establishment of ashram schools in TSP areas; strengthening edu-
cation of ST girls in low literacy districts; and pre-matric scholarship for ST students.35
However, no convergence
across Central Ministries/Departments on school education for SCs/STs seems to be taking place. At the same
time, any earmarking by the DSEL under the SCSP/TSP should come from specific programmes created for SC/
ST children to equalise their educational levels with others, in the same way that schemes and programmes exist
for girls and disabled children.
34 Replies to RTI applications iled by DAAA-NCDHR in 2011-12.
35 Ministry of Finance, 2013. Union Budget 2013-14, Expenditure Budget Vol. 1, Statement 22: Budget Provisions for Schemes for the Welfare
of Children. New Delhi: Government of India.

21
1.2 Three Major School Education Schemes from an
Equity-Inclusion Angle
Within school education, three major schemes are next examined: Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan; Rashtriya Madhya-
mik Shiksha Abhiyan; and Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti. As seen from Tables 2.2 & 2.3, these three schemes are
among the top four schemes (the fourth being the Midday Meals in Schools scheme) to allocate funds under the
SCSP/TSP. The three schemes are briefly outlined, including their specific programmes for addressing equity and
inclusion issues in education for SC/ST children. The next section then analyses at the budgetary allocations and
expenditures for these schemes under SCSP/TSP at the central government level.
(I) SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SSA)
SSA is a centrally sponsored scheme launched in 2001, under which central and state governments share fi-
nancial responsibility in the ratio 65:35. It is the primary vehicle for ensuring elementary education for all children
aged 6 to 14 years in the country, with its focus on adequate school infrastructure, personnel, academic support,
etc. There is also a specific focus on disadvantaged social groups, including SCs and STs, and bridging gender
and social gaps. The equity agenda of SSA is stated as follows: working towards and rights and entitlements
approach to elementary education; developing an understanding of the issues that contribute to social exclusion;
assessing the needs of different excluded social groups and thereafter address these needs through contextu-
alised strategies; an encouraging innovative thinking to identify holistic and viable strategies to address social
exclusion and promote equity across different SSA goals.36
Thus, allowance is given for context-specific interventions and strategies for education of these target groups
in line with the RtE Act. SSA has also targeted geographical areas in districts and blocks where SCs and STs
are concentrated in the matter of allocation of funds and school infrastructure to promote elementary education.
Special Focus Districts are currently identified with 25% and above SC and ST populations as follows: 61 districts
with a high SC population and 109 districts with a high ST population. The education plans in these districts
should provide for interventions to focus on the specific problems of these communities in the districts. As per
the 2012-13 budget, SC and ST concentrated districts received 12% each of the total national SSA budget. The
equity strategy under SSA is translated into free textbooks to be given to all students, including SC/ST students,
in classes 1-8. Back to school camps, bridge course and other alternative schooling facilities are to be given to
those children who are out of school, as well as special coaching/remedial classes to improve learning outcomes.
Teacher sensitisation programmes should also promote equitable learning opportunities and address in-class
discrimination. SC/ST representation in the school management committees is another mandated strategy, as is
the deployment of tribal coordinators at the state level and in ST populated districts to monitor SSA activities.37
The planning process at the district level, moreover, should ensure the large-scale participation of women and
other disadvantaged groups so as to ensure community ownership of the district plan for elementary education.
Under the 12th
Five Year Plan, one of the strategic areas under SSA is to address residual access and equity
gaps in elementary education. This is to be achieved through such measures as residential school complexes
in blocks with over 50% ST population; residential schools for SC children; seasonal hostel facilities for SC/ST
children of migrating families; special educational support for SC/ST children; curriculum revision to address
caste-based exclusion and to promote inclusion; and encouraging partnerships with Dalit civil society organisa-
tions.38
However, equity measures are rarely being discussed by government officials, especially with regard to
SC/ST children. For instance, the Conference of State Education Secretaries, held in January 2012, reviewed the
implementation of the Right to Education Act without any mention of SC/ST children, nor any equity measures
beyond special trainings for mainstreaming out-of-school children. At the same time, guidelines on preparing the
36 MHRD, 2011. SSA Framework for Implementation based on the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. New Delhi: Govern-
ment of India, para 3.3.2.
37 Ministry for Human Resource Development, 2011. Annual Report 2010-11. New Delhi: MHRD, p.196.
Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, pp.60-61.

22
Annual Work Plans and Budgets for 2012-13 specifically mentioned the need for systemic change to ensure that
all classroom material and translations are discrimination and bias-free. States were to prepare their plans de-
scribing how this would be ensured through the curriculum, syllabus and teaching learning materials; classroom
practices; management and administration of all incentives and provisions from a child rights perspective; and
training programmes for teachers and school management committee members on how to address these issues
in schools.39
While SSA currently receives the highest amount of funds, the current challenge is to design specific schemes
for SC/ST children to address the educational needs and issues of discrimination and exclusionary practices
that these children face. While some state governments have been utilising the ‘district equity innovation funds’
(Rs 50 lakhs per district) under SSA for these purposes, most districts do not use these funds, or else use them
for programmes that do not close the educational gap between SC/ST students and other students. This was
confirmed by the Performance Audit report on SSA in 2006, which found that funds to the tune of Rs 39.80 crore
remained unutilised as no innovative activities for girls, SC/ST education and computer training were undertaken.
Moreover, free textbooks in many instances did not reach the target groups like SC/ST children, or reached them
late.40
At present, the only direct benefits that SC/ST students receive under SSA are financial support towards
their uniforms, textbooks, or scholarships, which comprise only a small percentage of the SSA funds.
Furthermore, as far as financial commitments to operationalise the right to elementary education are concerned,
there is less clarity. The MHRD has estimated the need to increase funds by around Rs 10,000 to 12,000 crores in
order to finance the implementation of the Act. However, in 2010-11, the allocation for SSA, which is the primary
scheme for implementation of the RTE Act, was only Rs 15,000 crores, or roughly half the amount required to
implement the Act.41
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development likewise noted
that the budgetary allocation of Rs 25,555.00 crore for SSA in 2012-13 (as against the Department’s demand for
Rs 40,000 crore) was insufficient, which would hinder the implementation of SSA-RTE programmes within the
stipulated timeframe under the RTE Act.42
At the same time, funds have been reported as diverted to activities
and schemes that are beyond the scope of SSA43
, or else available SSA funds have been under-utilised.44
The
latter may in part be due to schools tending to receive their grants under SSA only during the second half of the
fiscal year.45
(II) RASHTRIYA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (RMSA)
RMSA is a centrally sponsored scheme launched in 2009-10, under which central and state governments share
financial responsibility in the ratio 75:25. The main objectives of the scheme are to enhance access to secondary
education and improve its quality. Under the 12th
Plan, it is envisaged that RMSA will be made a single compre-
hensive scheme to address the issues of coverage (including availability, accessibility and affordability) and quality
in secondary education. The 12th
Plan also stresses the need to build capacity in secondary schools to absorb
the students passing out of elementary education today. The RMSA guidelines specify that the educational de-
velopment of SC, ST, OBC and educationally backward minority children is a special focus in the scheme. Every
activity under the programme should identify the benefits that will accrue to children from these communities.
39 Department of School Education and Literacy, 2012. Minutes of Conference of State Education Secretaries, held on 4-6 January 2012.
New Delhi: MHRD.
40 Comptroller Auditor General of India, 2006. Performance Audit on Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Report No. 15 of 2006. New Delhi: CAG,
paras 7.4.6 & 7.5.1.3.
41 Mehrotra, Santosh, 2010. “he Right to Education and its Financing”. CBGA Budget Track, Vol. 7, Issues 2&3, p. 12.
Sabha on 03.05.2012.
43 Comptroller Auditor General of India, 2006. Performance Audit on Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Report No. 15 of 2006. New Delhi: CAG,
paras 7.2.4.1-.2.
44 Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability & UNICEF India, 2011. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Budgeting for Change Series, 2011.
New Delhi: CBGA & UNICEF, pp.8-11. Utilisation data examined from 2005-06 to 2009-10.
45 ASER 2011 indings, as reported in Ministry of Finance, 2012. Economic Survey 2011-12. New Delhi: Government of India, p.322.

23
Moreover, the participation of SCs/STs in the affairs of the school is to be ensured through representation in the
School Management Committees. RMSA is very progressive in that it addresses a number of equity elements,
namely: (i) special focus in micro-planning addressing the needs of every child, especially for interventions for SC/
ST students; (ii) preference to Ashram schools in ST-populated areas in upgradation; (iii) preference to areas with
concentration of SCs/STs for opening of schools; (iv) special enrolment drive for the weaker sections (including
SCs/STs); (v) more female teachers in schools; and (vi) separate toilet blocks for girls. The RMSA Guidelines go
as far as to suggest some equity strategies such as: free lodging/boarding facilities for SC/ST students; hostels/
residential schools; cash incentives, uniform and books; providing scholarships to meritorious/needy students at
the secondary level.
The 12th
Five Year Plan, however, is mostly silent as to equity measures under RMSA. At most, the government
acknowledges its prime responsibility to provide access to secondary education for disadvantaged groups such
as SC/ST children through focusing on educationally backward blocks where many SC/ST children reside.46
To
date, while the bulk of RMSA funds have focused on ensuring the necessary infrastructure and personnel in sec-
ondary schools, equal priority to the afore-mentioned equity elements has not taken place. Gaps therefore still
remain in terms of ensuring more secondary schools in SC/ST populated areas; fee waivers in residential schools
for SC/ST children; the reorganisation of ashram schools into residential school complexes for ST children; and
the creation of innovative schemes to address the discrimination and exclusion of SC/ST children in second-
ary schools. At the Conference of State Education Secretaries, held in January 2012, equity measures were
discussed in terms of the need for proper identification, planning and effective strategies for ensuring secondary
education for SC/ST children; special sub plans or projects for disadvantaged areas and social groups like SCs/
STs; special interventions for SC/ST girls, who form a major chunk of dropouts from elementary education; and a
focus on eliminating discriminatory practices in classrooms and schools against disadvantaged children like SC/
ST children.47
However, to date no equity action plans have been developed by states detailing any needs-based
equity interventions, nor annual targets related to equity with the methods by which they will be achieved.
Like SSA, RMSA has suffered from low release of funds: for the years 2009-10 to 2011-12 only a total of Rs
4550.00 crores was sanctioned and released under this scheme. This was due then to technical issues such as
the non-adoption of state-specific schedule of rates. Only from the financial year 2012-13 onwards has a fairly
substantial budget been released under RMSA.
(III) NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI (NVS)
NVS was started in 1985-86. Under the scheme residential schools called Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNVs)
are set up in the districts to enable talented rural children to access high quality education, especially those who
might not otherwise be able to afford such education or able to access such education usually found only in ur-
ban areas. NVS is a central scheme wherein funds flow directly from the central government to the regional JNV
offices across the country, and from these offices directly to the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya residential schools
(JNVs) for classes 6 to 12 in the districts. As on January 2012, there are 586 functional JNV schools across 586
districts in the country, which fall directly under central government control. An additional 378 JNV schools are
to be created under the 12th
Plan, with their scope expanded including to provide for enrolment for economically
weaker sections. The JNVs have as one main objective to ensure academic excellence coupled with equity and
social justice. The claim is that these schools have strengthened a feeling of national integration among students,
including SC/ST students.48
Five Year Plan, Vol. 3: Social Sector. New Delhi: Government of India, p. 73.
47 Department of School Education and Literacy, 2012. Minutes of Conference of State Education Secretaries, held on 4-6 January 2012.
New Delhi: MHRD, Annexure 10.
48 Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 2007. 24th
Report on Ministry of Human Resource Development
(Department of School Education and Literacy): Reservation in Services including in Admission and Employment in Kendriya Vidyalayas and
Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat.

24
With regard to admissions to the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya (JNV) residential schools, this is through an admis-
sions test. A total of 75% of seats are reserved for rural children and a minimum of 33% of seats are reserved for
girls. SCs and STs also have due reservations in proportion to their population in the concerned district, provided
that in no district is the reservation to be less than the national average (16.2% for SCs and 8.2% for STs), but
subject to a maximum of 50% reservation for both categories together. SC/ST students receive a relaxation in
the minimum qualifying marks (28%) for admission into JNVs. In 2011-12, there were 24% SC children and 15%
ST children studying in the JNVs.49
A gender-wise disaggregation of these numbers is not available. However,
data from JNV schools in both Nalanda and Jamui districts in Bihar noted over two-thirds were boys. These res-
ervations exist over and above the candidates selected under open merit. Moreover, in order to ensure that SC/
ST children are not denied admission into JNVs, their admissions are supposedly thoroughly monitored at the
school level by the respective District Education Officers and District Collector, and at the regional and national
headquarters by Samiti officials.50
Education and board and lodge in JNVs are free of cost for all students. Only in classes 10 to 12 is a nominal
fee of Rs 200 per month charged to all students, except for SC/ST students, girls and BPL students. Currently,
there are no specific guidelines or programmes created to respond to the specific educational needs of SC/ST
children in the JNVs. Nor do the guidelines for the formation of Parent-Teacher Associations for the JNVs stipulate
the presence of a SC/ST member as one of the three parents’ representatives in each Association. While the
Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has indicated that it would like to be ap-
prised of the educational progress made by SC/ST children as compared to other students in JNVs51
, it has not
recommended any specific programmes to support SC/ST children and ensure the closure of any educational
gap between them and other JNV students.
1.3 Three Major School Education Schemes:
Analysis of SCSP and TSP
In the 2013-14 budget, the total funds allocated for SSA stand at Rs 27,258 crores, for RMSA at Rs 3883 crores,
and for NVS at Rs 1250 crores. As a percentage of the entire DSEL school education plan budget for that year,
SSA accounted for 54.9%, RMSA for 7.8%, and NVS for 2.5%. Notably, their allocations as per Statements 21
and 21A under SCSP and TSP respectively differ from the amounts calculated based on the Detailed Demands
for Grant of the Department of School Education and Literacy. Furthermore, flagship programmes like SSA and
RMSA operate as general schemes and have few special programmes to address SC/ST issues in elementary
education. In both schemes, a focus exists on paper on equity and innovative programmes, with both mention-
ing SC/ST children for these programmes. However, in practice, allocations for these types of programmes have
been minimal. Similarly, NVS has no programmes specifically for SCs/STs beyond providing reservations at the
time of admissions. Again, examining the three schemes allocations under SCSP/TSP (as per Statements 21 and
21A) as a proportion of their total scheme funds for the year 2013-14, all three schemes have allocated 20% of
their funds under SCSP and 10.7% of their funds under TSP.
Next, looking at the Detailed Demands for Grants for 2012-13 and 2013-14 (Tables 2.8 & 2.9), a disproportionate
amount of funds flow for grants-in-aid for the creation of capital assets and grants-in-aid general, without any
indication of how such funds will be of direct benefit to SC/ST students. In addition, NVS also allocated funds for
49 Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, 2012. 244th
Report on Demands for Grants
2012-13 of Department of School Education and Literacy. Presented to Rajya Sabha on 03.05.2012 and laid on table of Lok Sabha on
03.05.2012.
Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, para. 2.11.
Navodaya Vidyalayas. New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat, para. 2.16.

25
teachers’ salaries under SCSP/TSP, without any indication of how these funds are allocated and if they are spent
solely for the salaries of SC/ST teachers.
Table 2.8 | Dept of School Education and Literacy: Object-wise breakdown of SCSP & TSP 2012-13
Sub
Plan
Sub Head Schemes 2012-13 BE
Grants-in-
aid General
Grants for
Creation of
Capital Assets
Grants-
in-aid for
Salaries
Other
Admin.
Expenses
Scholarship/
Stipends
SCSP
Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan
4934.64 3306.21 1628.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rashtriya
Madhyamik Shiksha
Abhiyan
614.80 236.00 378.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti
232.60 88.68 81.81 62.11 0.00 0.00
TSP
Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan
1489.12 1332.71 156.41 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rashtriya
Madhyamik Shiksha
Abhiyan
288.46 111.00 177.46 0.00 0.00 0.00
Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti
114.40 47.44 35.90 31.06 0.00 0.00
Table 2.9 | Dept of School Education and Literacy: Object-wise breakdown of SCSP & TSP 2013-14
Sub
Plan
Sub Head Schemes 2013-14 BE
Grants-
in-aid
General
Grants for
Creation of
Capital Assets
Grants-
in-aid for
Salaries
Other
Admin.
Expenses
Scholarship/
Stipends
SCSP
Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan
5451.60 4361.27 1090.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rashtriya
Madhyamik Shiksha
Abhiyan
796.60 239.60 557.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti
250.00 96.18 84.81 69.01 0.00 0.00
TSP
Sarva Shiksha
Abhiyan
2916.61 2330.24 586.37 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rashtriya
Madhyamik Shiksha
Abhiyan
426.18 128.80 297.38 0.00 0.00 0.00
Navodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti
133.75 57.44 41.80 34.51 0.00 0.00
The allocations for SCSP/TSP under these three schemes, therefore, amount to mathematical accounting with-
out direct financial flows for the special needs or issues of SC/ST children. In other words, most of these funds
are notional or general allocations. This is further confirmed by the breakdown of funds under SCSP/TSP for the
various education schemes (Tables 2.6 & 2.7). The majority of funds allocations, including for RMSA, SSA and
NVS, are general in that it is presumed that 20.0% and 10.7% of their schemes will be utilised for SC/ST children.
However, these schemes do not have programmes for SC/ST students specifically, and so funds do not flow
in reality to these children. Even for SSA’s Special Focus Districts with high SC and ST populations, it has been
noted that the interventions so far have not yielded positive results that could justify allocations under SCSP/
TSP. Moreover, as the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development has recently noted,
“mere sanction of infrastructure facilities may not make any impact unless it is followed by focused strategies.”52
Sabha on 03.05.2012, paras 3.27-.28.

26
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Department of School Education and Literacy seems to be mechanically allocating funds under
the SCSP/TSP without any proper needs assessment of SC/ST children in schooling, planning of schemes and
programmes for SC/ST children, and accordingly budgeting under SCSP/TSP. Recently, an Andhra Pradesh
Cabinet Sub-Committee report has spelled out the major loopholes in central government planning under SCSP/
TSP:
‘While Central Ministries are expected to prepare plans under SCSP/TSP taking into account the needs
of SCs/STs, there is no evidence of this taking place in any Central Ministry... Central Government Minis-
tries do not have the expertise to plan exclusively for the development of SCs/STs.... Even the Ministries
that have allocated funds under SCSP/TSP have mechanically shown such allocation under the ongoing
general schemes... The concept of non-divertibility and non-lapsbility of SCSP/TSP funds has not been
operationalised by the Government of India.’53
All this seems to hold true for the Department of School Education and Literacy, MHRD as well. Without a nodal
ofﬁcer in the Ministry to coordinate planning of the SCSP/TSP, mostly general schemes without speciﬁc SC/ST
programmatic components are being notionally earmarked under the SCSP/TSP. Meanwhile, the outcomes are
the continuing lower educational levels of SC/ST children in the country. The Ministry itself has acknowledged
the need to ensure better planning for SC/ST children under the SCSP/TSP in 2012, when it set up a taskforce
to generate guidelines for the implementation of MHRD education programmes and schemes under SCSP/TSP.
The challenge, therefore, is to reorient the school system and centre stage equity in DSEL schemes. All this would
contribute towards ensuring accountability for SC/ST children’s learning, as vital future citizens of the country.
53 Draft Report of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Scheduled Caste Sub-Plan (SCSP) and Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP), submitted to the State
Government of Andhra Pradesh, August 2012, p.11.

27
Bihar and Jharkhand provide interesting contrasts with their high SC and ST populations respectively, alongside
continuing low educational indicators for these two social groups. In both states, budgeted expenditure on edu-
cation by the education departments – the Education Department in Bihar and Department of Human Resource
Development in Jharkhand – amounts to around one-fifth of each state’s total revenue budget: in 2010-11, it
was 20.2% in Bihar and 17.4% in Jharkhand. However, an examination of the Education Department budgets
as a percentage of the GSDP reveals that the actual expenditure on education is low: it amounts to only 3.78%
(Bihar) and 2.69% (Jharkhand) of the GSDP (as on 2010-11).54
Further, in Bihar, the Common School System
Commission, constituted in 2006 to review the existing school education structure in the state and to prepare a
roadmap for universal elementary education by 2012-13, secondary education by 2015-16 and higher secondary
education by 2016-17, noted a resource gap of around Rs 5,700 to 10,100 crores in terms of required annual
expenditure to meet the first target.55
PAISA studies in 2011 have also shown that for major education schemes
like SSA, the majority of funds flow to teachers and schools, and less than 15% to children themselves in terms of
direct entitlements like textbooks, remedial teaching and special measures for out-of-school children. Moreover,
expenditure trends indicate that even these small allocations that directly benefit children are not even close to
being fully spent: e.g. in 2010-11 only 43% of allocations for Bihar’s school children reached them as compared
54 Ministry of Human Resources Development, 2012. Analysis of Budgeted Expenditure on Education 2008-09 to 2010-11. New Delhi:
MHRD, table 7.
55 Ghosh, Prabhat P., 2012. ‘Financing Elementary Education in Bihar’. Presentation at the Consultation on Education Financing organ-
ised by the Council of Social Development, New Delhi on27.02.2012.
School Education
and SCSP/TSP in
Bihar and Jharkhand
CHAPTER 2

28
to 64% in Jharkhand.56
In this situation of low expenditure on school education in general in both states, the
SCSP/TSP become even more relevant to ensuring that Dalit and Adivasi children are not denied access to and
enjoyment of school education.
2.1 Socio-Economic and Educational Status of Dalits and
Adivasis in the Two States
As per the 2001 census, in Bihar scheduled castes number 1,30,48,608 and scheduled tribes 7,58,351. They
represent 15.7% and 0.9% respectively of the state’s population, and a total of 16.6 percent. By contrast, in
Jharkhand scheduled tribes number 31,89,000 and scheduled castes 7,87,000. They represent 26.3% and
11.8% respectively of the state’s population, and a total of 38.1%.
A large percentage of the SC/ST population in both states is children. According to the MHRD Selected Educa-
tion Statistics 2010-11, the estimated SC/ST child population in Bihar is: for SCs, 31.1 lakhs in the age group
6-13 years and 13.4 lakhs in the age group 14-17 years; for STs, 1.8 lakhs in the age group 6-13 years and 0.8
lakhs in the age group 14-17 years. As a percentage of the total child population in the state, SC children repre-
sented 15.3% and ST children 0.9%. In Jharkhand, the estimated SC/ST child population is: for STs, 15.02 lakhs
in the age group 6-13 years and 7.49 lakhs in the age group 14-17 years; for SCs 7.15 lakhs in the age group
6-13 years and 3.33 lakhs in the age group 14-17 years. As a percentage of the total child population in the state,
ST children represented 26.14% and SC children 12.17%.
The economic status of both communities in Bihar and Jharkhand is very poor. In 2004-05, Planning Commis-
sion data showed that in Bihar, 64.0% of rural SCs and 67.2% of urban SCs lived below the state’s poverty line.
STs were only slightly less poor, with 53.3% in rural areas and 57.2% in urban areas living below the poverty line.
Similarly in Jharkhand, 54.2% of rural STs and 45.1% of urban STs lived below the state’s poverty line. SCs were
even poorer, with 57.9% in rural areas and 47.2% in urban areas living below the poverty line.
In terms of education, the overall literacy rates (age 7+) in Bihar, as per the 2001 census, stood at 47.5% (60.3%
for males and 33.6% for females). The literacy rates for STs and SCs, however, were much lower. For SCs, the
overall literacy rate was 28.5%, which is much lower than that of all SCs at the national level (54.7%). Likewise,
the SC male and female literacy rates (40.2% and 15.6%) were also considerably lower than those at the national
level (66.6% and 41.0%). Similarly, the ST literacy rate was 28.2%, much lower when compared with that of all
STs at the national level (47.1%). ST male and female literacy rates (39.8% and 15.5% respectively) continued to
be lower than those at the national level (59.2% and 34.8%).
In Jharkhand, the overall literacy rate (age 7+) was 53.6% (67.3% for males and 38.0% for females), but for STs
and SCs the literacy rates were much lower. For STs, the overall literacy rate has increased from 27.5% as per the
1991 census to 40.7% as per the 2001 census. Despite this improvement, the literacy rate among STs was much
below in comparison to that of all STs at the national level (47.1%). Like the overall literacy rate among the STs,
ST male and female literacy rates (54% and 27.2%) were also considerably lower than those at the national level
(59.2% and 34.8%). Similarly, though there was an improvement in the overall literacy rate of SCs from 23.7% as
per the 1991 census to 37.6% as per the 2001 census, it was still lower when compared with that of all SCs at
the national level (54.7%). SC male and female literacy rates (51.6% and 22.5% respectively) also continued to
be lower than those at the national level (66.6% and 41.9%).
A number of reports have highlighted the increasing enrolment ratio among SC/ST children in recent years. In
2009-10, the gross enrolment ratio57
in Bihar for SC children was 137.9 in classes 1-5, but dropped down to 59.1
56 Accountability Initiative & ASER, 2011. PAISA 2011: Do Schools Get their Money? New Delhi: AI & ASER.
57 GER is the ratio of the number of children enrolled in the class group to the total number of children in the corresponding oicial age
group.

Institutional exclusion in_education_final-libre

Institutional exclusion in_education_final-libre

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to Institutional exclusion in_education_final-libre

Similar to Institutional exclusion in_education_final-libre (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Institutional exclusion in_education_final-libre