[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Charumitra Rajwardhan Kamble (Minor vs . on 21 May, 2026
12-2089-2026-wp.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2089 OF 2026
Charumitra Rajwardhan Kamble (Minor)
Through Next Friend Father Rajwardhan Y. Kamble
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra, through the Chief Secretary and Ors
Ms. Ahilya Nalawade, advocate for the petitioner
Mr. R. P. Kadam, AGP for the State
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 21st MAY, 2026
(VACATION C0URT)
P. C. :
1. Leave to amend. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.
IRESH by IRESH
MASHAL
MASHAL Date: 2026.05.21
18:34:58 +0530
2. Present petitioner, six years child belongs to reserve category
is before this Court through her natural guardian ensuring
enforcement of a right, which is a fundamental right under Article
21A of the Constitution of India, by virtue of 86 Amendment Act vis-
a-vis the Statutory right in view of the Right of Children to Free and
Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 ('the said Act'). Equally, the
Act of 2009 places an obligation on State authorities to provide and
ensure admission, attendance and completion of elementary
education to every child in the age group of 6 to 14.
Iresh 1 of 4
12-2089-2026-wp.doc
3. The record reveals that the petitioner applied for admission to
the 1st standard for the academic year 2026-2027, commencing
from 10/06/2026, indicating Respondent No. 9, the school located
immediate to the place of residence of the petitioner. The State
authorities while not processing the application presented by the
Petitioner under Section 12(1) of the said Act, have failed to process
the application presented by the Petitioner, taking recourse to the
impeding stipulation contained in the communication dated
13/02/2026, which mandates that in case of parents residing in
tenanted premises, a leave and license agreement must be
registered. As such, the application cannot be processed.
4. The petitioner's right to admission in the school in the nearby
vicinity cannot be defeated merely due to the non-registration of the
leave and license agreement. It amounts to tinkering/militating
against the fundamental right of the petitioner.
5. The submission of the respondent-State authorities that the
said stipulation, much less the impugned clause, has been
incorporated in the communication, which is in the nature of an
administrative instruction, to ensure that preference is given only to
Iresh 2 of 4
12-2089-2026-wp.doc
neighbourhood children, cannot be countenanced, since the
enactment of 2009 has an overriding effect in view of Article 254 of
the Constitution of India. Therefore, prima facie the stipulation
appears to be unsustainable. In any case, the said stipulation shall
not be weaponized by the authorities to cause any delay or defeat
the petitioner's admission. The affidavit of the parent(s) indicating
the age and residence of the child shall be sufficient to ensure the
admission of the petitioner to the school indicated in application in
view of Section 12(1) of the Act of 2009.
6. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered view that
this Court cannot be a silent spectator to the act of the State, which
tinkers with the right of the petitioner to refuse admission of the
petitioner. The right of the petitioner is not only a fundamental right
but also a statutory one, which obligates the State to ensure that
every child within the 6 to 14 age group is essentially admitted to
school and further ensures completion of elementary education.
Therefore, under any eventuality gloss cannot be created on the
right of the petitioner.
7. Given these circumstances, the following directions are issued
to the respondent-authorities:
Iresh 3 of 4
12-2089-2026-wp.doc
I. The application presented by the petitioner should
be processed within five days from today; irrespective
of the closure of the portal, if required, such processing
shall be carried out manually, and grant provisional
admission with respondent no. 9, while conferring the
benefits to which the petitioner is lawfully entitled
under freeship/any other quota.
II. Education Officer, Primary, Zilla Parishad Kolhapur
shall ensure that this order is complied with, thereby
enrolling the petitioner's name in student data base.
III. Apart from above, Deputy Director of Education,
Kolhapur shall monitor that this order is complied and
petitioner is not prevented in any manner from
ensuring her admission in the ensuing academic year
2026-2027, commencing from 10/06/2026.
IV. Non-compliance of this order by the aforesaid
authorities would entail disciplinary action including
action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
V. It is made clear that under any eventuality,
technicalities should not be cited as a ground to delay
or defeat the admission of the petitioner.
8. Stand over to 11/06/2026, High on Board.
9. Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order.
[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.]
Iresh 4 of 4
