HEADNOTE
Vidya International School v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Court: Bombay High Court
Jurisdiction: Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Bench: Justices Ravindra V. Ghuge & Abhay J. Mantri
Date of Judgment: January 12, 2026
Citation: 2026:BHC-AS:1973-DB
Laws / Sections Involved: Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) – reimbursement provisions
Keywords: RTE reimbursement, entitlement grants, private unaided schools, arrears, scrutiny timeline, education law
Summary
The Bombay High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a private unaided school seeking release of arrears towards reimbursement under the RTE Act. Following earlier binding directions issued in similar matters, the Court directed the State to scrutinise the school’s claim within eight weeks, determine eligibility and quantum, and release admissible amounts within two weeks thereafter. If the school is found ineligible, the authorities must pass a reasoned order, leaving the school at liberty to pursue remedies in accordance with law. The decision reiterates uniform timelines and procedural fairness in processing RTE reimbursement claims.
Court’s decision
The Bombay High Court disposed of Civil Writ Petition No. 15263 of 2025 by issuing time-bound directions to the State authorities to examine the petitioner-school’s claim for reimbursement under the RTE Act. The Bench granted eight weeks for scrutiny of eligibility and quantum and directed release of admissible amounts within two weeks thereafter. In case of ineligibility, a reasoned order must be passed, preserving the school’s right to seek further redress.
Facts
Vidya International School, a private unaided institution in Nashik district, approached the High Court seeking payment of arrears allegedly due as entitlement grants under the RTE Act. The school relied on prior High Court orders granting similar relief to similarly placed institutions and sought parity in timelines and treatment from the Primary Education Department and its officers.
Issues
Whether the State should be directed to process and release RTE reimbursement arrears within fixed timelines, and whether uniform directions already issued in earlier cases ought to govern the present petition.
Petitioner’s arguments
The petitioner contended that reimbursement claims under the RTE Act were pending without decision and that identical relief had been granted by the High Court in earlier writ petitions. It sought a direction for expeditious scrutiny and disbursal, or a speaking order if the claim was rejected.
Respondents’ arguments
The State submitted that claims require verification of eligibility and quantum as per statutory norms and administrative checks. It did not oppose the adoption of timelines consistent with prior High Court directions.
Analysis of the law
The Court relied on its consistent approach in earlier matters involving RTE reimbursements, emphasising administrative accountability and timely decision-making. While the Court did not adjudicate the merits of eligibility, it underscored the obligation to decide claims promptly and transparently, either by disbursing admissible amounts or by issuing a reasoned rejection.
Precedent analysis
The Bench followed its earlier order in Gurukul English Medium School v. State of Maharashtra (WP No. 6020 of 2024), applying identical timelines and safeguards to ensure uniformity in RTE reimbursement processing.
Court’s reasoning
The Court found no reason to depart from established directions in similar cases. It balanced administrative scrutiny with the schools’ right to timely reimbursement by prescribing clear deadlines and mandating speaking orders in the event of rejection.
Conclusion
The writ petition was disposed of with directions for eight weeks’ scrutiny, two weeks’ disbursal thereafter, or issuance of a reasoned order if the claim is declined. Rule was discharged.
Implications
The ruling reinforces predictable timelines and procedural fairness for RTE reimbursement claims across Maharashtra, aiding private unaided schools while preserving the State’s verification prerogatives.
Case law references
• Gurukul English Medium School v. State of Maharashtra (WP No. 6020 of 2024)
Holding: Prescribed timelines for scrutiny and release of RTE reimbursements.
Application: Followed to dispose of the present petition with identical directions.
FAQs
Q1. What timelines did the Court prescribe for RTE reimbursement claims?
Eight weeks for scrutiny of eligibility and quantum, followed by two weeks for release of admissible amounts.
Q2. What if the school is found ineligible?
The authorities must pass a reasoned order, and the school may pursue remedies in law.
Q3. Did the Court decide the merits of eligibility?
No. The Court directed procedural timelines without adjudicating eligibility.
