The Supreme Court on Monday decided to examine a PIL seeking direction for regulation of “unrecognised” private coaching classes, proliferating across the country in an “institutionalised” manner in the name of preparing students for admission in IITs and medical colleges.
A bench of Justices K S Radhakrishnan and A K Sikri asked counsel Deepak Prakash, representing Students Federation of India (SFI), which filed the PIL, to provide a copy of the petition to advocate of the Centre for getting its response.
The court posted the matter for hearing after three weeks.
In its PIL, CPM’s students wing claimed that unregulated coaching centres imposed financial burden on the students and parents psychological stress, besides being in violation of the CBSE and Right to Education (RTE) guidelines.
The petitioner submitted that the Rs 35,000-crore coaching business was expected to grow to more than Rs 75,000 crore by 2014-15 as per Crisil Report.
The fee charged by the coaching classes was arbitrary, which caused huge financial burden on the parents, the petition said, claiming that the role of coaching institutes in preparation of the students was also doubtful.
According to the petitioner, these private coaching centres published false and misleading advertisements, using the names and photographs of successful students in their advertisements without their permission which amounted to their commercial exploitation. At times, it was revealed that one topper was claimed to have been trained by several institutes.
Giving a further grim picture, it pointed out that as many as 50 students committed suicide in 2011 in Kota in Rajasthan that has emerged as the hub of these institutions.
The petitioners sought response from the Centre and respective state governments as to why they had failed to regulate these institutions.
It also sought to know if the syllabus prepared by central and state education boards was not at par with standards of entrance examinations conducted for IIT and medical colleges.
The petition also wanted direction restraining the use of school premises and teachers by the coaching institutes.
Among others, the petitioners asked the court to seek explanation from the governments on the action taken by them to stop the publication of false and fraudulent advertisements and misuse of the photographs of minor students for commercial benefit.