Bombay High Court

CHINTAMANI INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL THR ITS HEAD MASTER SUCHETA K DAITHANKARversusTHE UNION OF INDIA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that the respondent authorities must independently scrutinize the reimbursement claim under the RTE Act and decide within four weeks, disbursing any amount due within four weeks thereafter.

Summary

The petitioners, a school, sought reimbursement of fees for the 25 % of students admitted under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The petition raised the question of whether the school was entitled to such reimbursement and what procedure the authorities must follow. The Court examined the statutory provision for reimbursement and the need for an independent, merit‑based scrutiny of the school’s claim. It directed the respondent authorities to examine the proposal on its own merit, decide within four weeks, and, if the school is found eligible, to disburse the amount within a further four weeks. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with these directions.

Issues considered

Is the school entitled to reimbursement of fees for the 25 % of students admitted under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009?

Legislation cited

Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009

Subjects

Right to Education
fee reimbursement
RTE Act
writ petition
education funding
public interest litigation

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:41504-DB


                                                1                   55-WP-11673-26.odt


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 11673 OF 2026

              CHINTAMANI INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL THROUGH ITS HEAD MASTER
                                            VERSUS
                    THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS
                                               ...
              Mr. Arvind S.Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner
              Mr. S. R. Wakle, AGP for Respondents/State
              Mr. Madhur A. Golegaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1
                                               ...
                                      CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                                ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                                       DATE : 08th SEPTEMBER, 2026

              PER COURT :

              1.           It is a matter of reimbursement of fees in respect of

              25% students admitted by the petitioners Institutions under the

              Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

              2.           Heard learned advocate for the petitioner, learned AGP

              for State and learned advocate for respondent No.1.

              3.           The writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent

              authorities to undertake scrutiny of the petitioner’s proposal

              independently, on it’s own merit and decide the same as

              expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of four

              weeks from today and if petitioner is found entitled to get

              reimbursement, shall disburse the money to it within a period of

              four weeks thereafter.



              (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)              (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)



              SVH

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…