 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home > Campaigns > Policy Campaign > Right to Education > Sibal and Das on RTE
Right to Education Act: Update on Current Debate
MHRD Minister Kapil Sibal’s answers to Gurcharan Das’s keynote speech at National Progressive Schools Conference on Friday 19 Feb 2010 sparked off a heady discussion in the media over the weekend. Here are some articles that outline this debate:
- First on Friday (19 Feb 2010), K. Sibal suggested that RTE imposes no limits on the fees and salaries of teachers in private schools1
- But on Saturday (20 Feb 2010), he took it back partly saying no profiteering in education should be allowed
- Then Delhi CM S. Dikshit asked for a meeting on Monday (22 Feb 2010)
for clarification.
- Later BJP, JD-U, a media response in Pioneer and All-India Parents
Association also criticized Sibal for his previous assertions with regards
to fees
- On Saturday (20 Feb 2010), K Sibal retraced that the RTE Act should
not lead to closure of budget private schools
- On Monday (22 Feb 2010), Centre is to hold discussion with States on relaxation of rules for private school facing closure
- Outside of the Sibal debate, an op-ed column by two Indian-American
scholars commented on the RTE Act and had similar views to that of the
School Choice Campaign
Note: See the footnote below which analyzes the provisions of the RTE Act and Rules with regards teacher salaries.
1. According to the Act, the salary and allowances payable to teachers should be prescribed as may be. The rules remain unclear on the subject. The Model rules state that:
- “18.(1) The State Government or the local authority, as the case may be, shall notify terms and conditions of service and salary and allowances of teachers in order to create a professional and permanent cadre of teachers.
- (3) The scales of pay and allowances, medical facilities, pension,
gratuity, provident fund, and other prescribed benefits of teachers,
including those employed for the purpose of imparting special training
as specified in Section 4 shall be that of regular teachers, and at
par for similar work and experience.”
These provisions remain unclear subject to further clarifications on the definition of regular teachers and announcements by proper authorities in this regard.
