Extent of the correct to training

Scope of the Right to Education, written by Surya Sunilkumar, student at the Ramaiah Institute of Legal Studies

T. Muhammad Faisi v Kerala State


After 35 years of confrontation with the government, the LP school residence in Elambra, Manjeri parish, has been brought to trial by the Kerala Supreme Court. The decision was made on July 29, 2020 when the bench of Hon’ble Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Hon’ble Judge Shaji P. Chaly decreed that the village’s children were entitled to an education which is why the government should provide facilities. The judgment on the right to education.

Facts of the case

Elambra is on the outskirts of the municipality of Manjeri. It is a socially and educationally backward area. The majority of the population, including members of the planned caste / tribes, are middle-class families whose calling is agriculture and coolie work. The petitioner submitted an immediate written petition stating that there were no primary schools within a 3km radius and that Elambra residents had made continuous efforts for many years to establish a state LP school there. Several declarations were made to various authorities, but no action was taken. Later, when the lack of land was cited as a reason, the locals brought land for the school to be built on. Even after that, the authorities did not take any action to build a school in Elambra.

The petitioner’s arguments

In order to achieve justice and the right to education, the petitioners made the following objections:
• The petitioners have approached several authorities to build a school in Elambra. Although the reports and surveys from these authorities indicated that Elambra is a socially backward village and in need of a school, no action has been taken and they have not fulfilled their duties.
• The petitioner’s lawyer also stated that the case has been pending in court for 35 years and has left the place educationally backward.
• Another claim was that the land was bought by the people for school building and the community is ready to build the building. All that is required is a sanction for establishing a state LP school.
• Pursuant to rule 6 of the 2011 Kerala Rules on Children’s Right to Free and Compulsory Education, an experienced lawyer for the petitioner has indicated that for children in Standards I through V, a school has been established within a 1km walk should be the neighborhood.

Respondent’s arguments

Respondents made the following objections to the petitioners’ claims:
• It was stated that schools were nearby so the school did not need to be built in this area.
• It has been argued that under the rules set out in Chapter V Rules 2 and 2 (a) of the Kerala Education Rules of 1959, establishing new schools is a government policy decision and individual requests cannot be considered.
• The petitioner cannot apply for a Mandamus deed based on the order issued by the Kerala State Human Rights Commission

The reasoning of the court

  1. The court referred to the preamble to the constitution to understand the rights it guaranteed.
  2. Articles 21, 38, 39 (a) and (f), 41 and 45 of the Constitution have been analyzed with several jurisdictions to understand the scope and applicability of these articles.
  3. Article 21 states: “No one may be deprived of his life or personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law.” The right to education is part of this article. Articles 38 and 39 (a) set out the importance of security and welfare and the right to decent livelihoods. Education is a way of living in today’s world. Article 41 deals in certain cases with the right to work, education and public support. Article 45 provides for free and compulsory education for children.
  4. If all of these sections are carefully examined, the Constitution states that the petitioner has the right to education as it is part of social and economic well-being.
  5. The court held the scope of Article 21 A.
  6. The court also found that “…… the correct rule is that Mandamus will not lie if the duty is clearly in its discretion and the party on which the duty is based has exercised its discretion appropriately and within its jurisdiction, ie on Facts sufficient to support his actions…. “


The Hon’ble Kerala High Court issued a judgment finding that the petitioner will receive relief based on decisions and discussions during the trial. It allowed the petition that was filed and directed the Kerala government authorities to approve the establishment of the state LP school in Elambra within three months. The court ordered the community to take the necessary and quick steps to build the school.

Comments are closed.