COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RIGHT TO EDUCATION IN INDIA AND

UNITED STATES

MASTER OF LAWS (LL.M.).

Submitted by;

Samarth Darekar (UID PG23- 12)

COMPARATIVE PUBLIC LAW AND SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE

CODE- (ML 1.2)
Under the supervision of

PROF. (DR.) VIJAY PRATAP TIWARI

Professor of Law

August 2023

MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAGPUR

1
Statutes

Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009

Constitution of India ( bare text)
Elementary and secondary education act (ESEA)

List of cases

Mohini Jain v. State of Karanataka (1992) 18

Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993) 18
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1997) 19
TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) 19
Champakam Dorairajan v. State of Madras (1951) 21
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) 21
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1959) 22
Engel v. Vitale (1962) 22
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969)
22
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) 23

List of abbreviations

AIR All India Report

CABE Central Advisory Board of Education

CSS Common School System

ESSA Every Student Succeeds Act

NCLB No Child Left Behind Act

NPE National Policy On Education

PG Post Graduate
2
RTE right to education 2009

SSC Secondary School Certificate

UG Under Graduate

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

US United State

v. Verses

3
 Table of Contents

Subject page no.

List of status 4
List of cases 4
List of abbreviations 4
Table of Content 4

Part-1
Introduction

1.1 Introduction 5
1.2 Statement of problem 6
1.3 Research objectives 7
1.4 Research hypothesis 7
1.5 Research questions 8
1.6 Review of literature 8
1.7 Rational of the study 10
1.8 Research methodology 11
1.9 Scope and limitations 11
Part-2
Historical overview

2.1 Historical Development of the Right to Education in India 12

2.2 Historical Development of Education Rights in the U.S. 13

Part-3
Basics of right to education

3.1 Legal framework in India 15

3.2 Legal framework in the United States 15
3.3 Legal interpretations and case laws India and US 16

Part-4
Comparative Analysis of Legal Provisions

4
4.1 Comparative Assessment 23
4.1.1 Decoding The Indian Education System 23
4.1.2 The American Education System: Structure 24
4.2 Right to Education-comparative analysis 25

Part-5
Conclusion And Suggestions

5.1 Conclusion And Suggestions 26

Bibliography
I. Printed sources
1. Books
2. Articles
II. Electronic source
1. Bibliography

5
 Part-1
Introduction

1.1 Introduction
Education is the essential element of man's general development. Without fully binding
the
talents of its citizens, a modern society cannot attain its components of economic growth,
technical development, and cultural enhancement. An individual's personality relies on his
suggested knowledge and understanding. Education is regarded to bring about better change
between people. An individual's personality relies on the understanding and wisdom he offers.
Education offers possibilities for intellectual learning and development. Education plays a crucial
role in providing human beings with suitable facilities to lead a gracious and harmonious life.
Although everyone has the right to an education, many countries' educational institutions
continue to severely penalize and exclude girls. Gender inequality starts in early childhood and
persists throughout a girl's life, negatively affecting her ability to access education. Children skip
school because they have to work to support their families. But by forgoing their education, they
are forced to live in abject poverty. There is a severe scarcity of skilled instructors in many
nations, particularly developing nations. Even while public funds provide for the majority of
funding for education globally, there is still a significant amount of variety between different
nations and world regions. Children, their families, and communities can gain resilience and
hope for the future thanks to the structure and stability of education. Children who lack education
are at risk for a future of poverty and violence and lack the more sophisticated skills necessary to
contribute to the renewal and growth of their society.

6
 It is well acknowledged that both individuals and societies can benefit greatly from
education. In fact, basic education is today seen in the majority of nations as both a duty and a
right. While governments are normally expected to facilitate access to basic education, citizens
are frequently mandated by law to complete education up to a particular minimum level. A
population's level of education can be measured in large part by its level of literacy. The ability
to read and write a brief, straightforward statement about one's own life is the operational
definition of literacy as used by UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization)1

The law on the right to education (RTE), 2009, allows free and compulsory education for
kids in the backward segment of the economy. The Right to Education Act was previously
referred

to as the Right of Children to the Free and Compulsory Education Act.2

This act offers free and compulsory education for kids belonging to a weaker section of society
between the age group of 6 years and 14 years by offering 25 percent reservation in government
and private schools. With the enactment of the (RTE) act in April 2010, India became one of the
135 nations to make education a fundamental right for every kid. Ensuring access to education is
a condition that the right to education is fully realized. Without access, it is not possible to
guarantee the right to education. The RTE Act is the world's first regulation to ensure the
government is registered, attended and concluded. The parents are responsible for sending their
kids to schools in the US and elsewhere Sam Carlson (the world bank education specialist for
India)3 “Right Education should help the student, not only to develop his capacities, but to
understand his own highest interest.”-J. Krishna murti 4

1.2 Statement of problem

1
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is a specialized agency of
the United Nations (UN) aimed at promoting world peace and security through international cooperation in
education, arts, sciences and culture.
2
The constitution of India art. XXIA
3
Sharma, Suresh c. on the right to education act a commentary, (2014)
https://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:ep
4
Available at https://infed.org/mobi/jiddu-krishnamurti-and-his-insights-into-education.- visited on 28 sep.2023

7
 A comparative analysis of the right to education in India and the United States reveals
significant disparities and challenges in the two nations’ education systems. In India, a major
problem statement arises from the unequal access to quality education, particularly in rural areas.
The stark urban-rural divide in educational infrastructure and resources leads to unequal
opportunities for students, perpetuating socio-economic disparities. Simultaneously, the US faces
issues related to educational funding and disparities. The heavy reliance on property taxes for
funding means that schools in economically disadvantaged areas receive fewer resources,
contributing to inequalities in educational outcomes. Furthermore, in both countries, concerns
exist regarding the effectiveness of educational policies, including curriculum design, teacher
training, and assessment methods. A comprehensive comparative analysis of these issues is
crucial for policymakers to understand the shortcomings in their respective education systems
and work toward providing equal and quality education for all citizens.

1.3 Research objectives

1. Compare and contrast the accessibility of education in India and the US, particularly in
rural and economically disadvantaged areas.
2. Examine the funding mechanisms in both countries and assess their impact on
educational disparities.
3. Findings Investigate the effectiveness of education policies, including curriculum design,
teacher training, and assessment methods in improving educational outcomes.
4. Identify successful strategies and policies from both countries that can be adapted to
improve education access and quality.
5. Give recommendations and suggestions for address the identified shortcomings and work
towards providing equitable and quality education.

1.4 Hypothesis

1) Disparities exist in access to education between India and the US. This may encompass
variations in enrollment rates, school infrastructure, availability of educational resources,
inclusivity measures, and efforts to ensure equal educational opportunities for all.

8
2) There are differences between India and the US in their legal frameworks pertaining to the
right to education. This may include variations in constitutional provisions, legislative acts, and
international commitments ensuring the right to education.

3) Differences exist in the educational policies related to the right to education in India and the
US. This may include variations in policies regarding school funding, curriculum design, teacher
training, inclusion of marginalized groups, and measures to address educational disparities.

1.5 Research questions

1. How does the legal framework of the right to education differ between India and the United
States?

2. What are the primary barriers and challenges to ensuring the right to education in India and the
United States?

3. How do government policies and funding mechanisms for education differ between India and
the United States, and how do they impact the realization of the right to education?

4. What are the similarities and differences in educational outcomes and quality between India
and the United States?

5. How do the educational systems and curriculum of India and the United States differ and how
does this impact the right to education?

1.6 Review of literature

1. In the research article written by Upendra Jeph on comparative analysis on educational

rights in India and United State the author has briefly discussed the educational right in
India and us he also study the comparison between different countries which helps to
study finding provisions and loophole in governing the administration of education.

9
 According to author, The right to education is expressly not distinguished in the
declaration but in the declaration three principles are pointed in; “ The child must be
provided with the necessary means for ordinary Growth. “ The backward kid has to be
assisted, ; “The child should be able to earn a living. The educational system in ancient
India was distinct, noble and great. In the past, academics knew nothing about the art of
writing, and it was only used to preserve literature when acknowledged by scientists.
India has a long trend of traditional education by way of both formal. After getting
independence, the thinking of Indian constitution framers influenced by two main
considerations “The general model adopted by USA. “ The recommendations of Hartog
committee. As in USA, the education was made state subject and also vest residuary
power in education in the state government. In respect of primary education, takes a
recommendation of Hartog committee.
2. Mohammad Rasikh Waiq in article “ A comparative analysis of child right to education
in India and the country in this article discuss about The right to education is universal,
yet girls continue to suffer severe disadvantage and exclusion within education systems in
many countries. Gender disparity, which begins in early childhood and is present at all
stages of girls’ lives, impacts negatively on their access to education. Access to sanitation
such as private and separate latrines Education is the process of facilitating learning, or
the acquisition of knowledge, skills, values, beliefs, and habits. Educational methods
include teaching, training, storytelling, discussion, and directed research. Education
frequently takes place under the guidance of educators however, learners can also educate
themselves.
3. In the article written by the Ketki Tara kumaiyan on “ comparative analysis of right to
education across the world ”. The author discussed the all world wide parameters of right
ro education. Further the author discussed on Research and experience demonstrates that
an educated labor force is a necessary, albeit not sufficient, condition for economic
development. Across countries, the correlation between national investment in education
and economic growth is striking. One can see that investment in education is considered
to be an indispensable asset for the economic augmentation of a country and that is why
many nations allocated a massive share for basic education as it promised higher returns.
According to author the parameters that right to education has been structured globally

10
 now. The substance of the right has been carved out in broad terms by the international
legislations but its real meaning is to be found in the national legislation that incorporate
it. It is identifiable that the 86th Amendment Act is quite aligned to the international
norms of availability, accessibility, acceptability and adaptability. The author while
councluding the article has state that This cross-sectional analysis of national legislations
on elementary education has given a new boost to our foundational knowledge about the
constitutionality of education as a right. It can be seen that each system has prescribed its
own mechanisms for implementing the ambitious aim of universalization of education
and has embarked on colossal attempts to make it a priority in their national charters.
RTE has in a way become a new symbol of democratization of rights and knowledge.
4. In the article authored by Ashley Feasley on “Recognizing Education Rights in India and
the united states” the author has mainly focused on right to education in India that all
roads lead to the court. He also discussed on a fundamental right to education, the United
States provides educational rights to its citizens. 5 While there are rights related to
education, particularly access to public schools, 6 the refusal to acknowledge a
fundamental right to education has prevented consistent and equal implementation of
education rights and resources within the United States. Lasty he stated that India, the
world’s largest democracy, possesses a well-developed judicial system and has a history
of constitutional rights litigation relating to the promotion of social rights, and
specifically, the right to education. However, India is still a developing country with
resource . Unlike America, India has articulated and recognized the right to education
but faces obstacles in implementation of its progressive realization of the remedy-
universal primary schooling.

1.7 Rationale of the study

Education is a fundamental human right and a key driver of social and economic development.
By comparing two diverse and influential nations like India and the United States, the study can
offer insights and lessons that are globally relevant. Both countries grapple with disparities in
access to quality education. India faces rural-urban disparities, while the US contends with
5
https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1339&context=pilr(last visited on 03 October 2023)
6
Case-Brown v. Board off Education, 347 U.S. 483

11
funding-related disparities. Understanding these issues is essential for crafting effective policies
to address educational inequalities. Comparative analyses of education systems can shed light on
the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches. This not only informs domestic policies
but also fosters cross-cultural learning and collaboration in the global context. The study
contributes to the academic understanding of education systems, policies, and outcomes. It adds
to the body of knowledge in the fields of education, sociology, economics, and public policy.

1.8 Research Methodology

The researcher has used the Doctrinal approach of research which means that researcher used
various resources to understand the meaning of the project. The researcher, in the research of the
project, trusted various secondary sources as there are no primary source available. Doctrinal
method is normally a two-part process, because it involves first locating the sources of the law
and then interpreting and analyzing the text. First part of doctrinal methodology: Locate the
sources of law. Once the documents are located and read, the application of such techniques,
along with a description of, for example, the use of deductive logic, inductive reasoning and
analogy where appropriate, would constitute the second part of the methodology. This approach
is beneficial by providing a solid structure for crafting a thesis, organizing the paper, and
enabling a thorough definition and explanation of the rule.

The study employs a doctrinal method of research where the study is to identify and assess the
right to education of children in India, the USA, and whether an acceptance of a universal right
to education can lead to the benefits of economic efficiency and improvements in social
welfare.

1.9 Scope and limitations

The study will comprehensively compare the education systems, policies, and outcomes in India
and the United States. It will focus on assessing both access to education and the quality of
education, examining disparities and achievements in these areas. The research aims to identify
successful strategies and policies that have led to improved education outcomes in both
countries.

The study is limited only to the India and United State jurisdiction and their laws
governing right to education only. Further, The study's findings may be limited to the time period

12
in which data was collected, and it may not capture long-term trends or future developments. It
also restricted by Language Barriers, Language differences could pose challenges in accessing
and interpreting research and documentation from India.

Part-2
Historical overview
2.1.Historical Development of the Right to Education in India

On 26th January 1950 when Constitution of India was reinforced, it had in its Article 45 a
directive principle promising free and compulsory education for all children until they complete
the age of 14 years. This was to be attained within 10 years. But the state that was responsible for
implementing the constitutional promise of free and compulsory education for all children up to
the age of 14 years could not do so for next 5 decades. In the 60th year of India became
Republic, on the 27th day of August 2009, Right of children to free and compulsory education
act 2009 was notified. Through 86th constitutional amendment, Article 21-a (part III) was
inserted in the fundamental right section of constitution under which, “The State shall provide
free and compulsory education to all children of the age of 6 to 14 years in such manner as the
state may, by law, determine. The path to the most sought ‘Right to Education’ was not as simple
and easy. For understanding it in a better way, we will have to dwell into the history of Indian
Education. 1950: Constitution of India provided under Article 45, as one of the directive
principles of State policy, which states that: The State shall endeavor to provide for a period of
ten years from the inception of the Constitution, for free and compulsory education for all
children until they reached the age of fourteen.

1968: First National Commission established for education under the supervision of Dr. Kothari
and submits its reports. It introduced several far-flight changes as a uniform syllabus for both
boys and girls, mathematics and science should be made as compulsory subjects and It is also
proposed a common school system.

1976: Constitutional amendment for making education in a concurrent subject (responsibility of

central and state) was passed.

1986: The National Policy on Education (NPE) supports to Common School System (CSS) and
was formulated. Subsequent NPE’s endorsed CSS but it has never been implemented.

13
1991: A book is written Myron Wiener bearing the title The Child and State in India: Child labor
& Education in comparative perspective highlighting the states’ failure to swap up child labor
and exploitation on child and enforce compulsory education in India.

1993: The Supreme court in the case of Mohini Jain and Unnikrishnan vs State of Andhra
Pradesh ruled that the right to education is a fundamental right that flows from the Right to life in
Article 21 under Indian Constitution.

1997: Constitutional Amendment for making Education as a fundamental right was introduced.

2002: 86th Constitution Amendment takes place and insertion of Article 21A has been done,
which states that “The State shall be bound to provide free and compulsory education to all
children of the age group between six to fourteen years in such as a law, determine.” This 86th
Amendment also brings changes in Article 45 which reads as “The state shall endeavor to
dispense early childhood care and free education for all children until they reached the age of 6
years”. And also added a new fundamental duty under Article 51A(K).

2005: CABE committee report established to draft the Right to Education Bill submits its report.

Every time a new phase or version was placed until it was presented in Parliament in 2008.
The bill was approved by the cabinet members on 2 July 2009. Lok Sabha passed the bill on 4
august 2009 and the Rajya Sabha on 20 July 2009. It received President assent and was conferred
as the law on 3 Sept 2009 as The Children’s Children’s Right to Free and Compulsory Education
Act RTE, 2009. After many schedules of meetings, drafting and redrafting the right to education
act was made which is a genuine instrument to full fill the basic demand and securing social
justice for every child.

2.2. Historical Development of the Right to Education in United State.

The historical development of educational rights in the United States can be traced back to the
colonial era. In 1642, the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed the first law requiring all children to
be educated. Other colonies followed suit, and by the time of the American Revolution, most
colonies had some form of compulsory education law.

14
In the early 19th century, there was a growing movement for free public education. Horace
Mann, a Massachusetts educator and politician, played a leading role in this movement. Mann
argued that education was essential for democracy and that all children should have access to a
quality education. By the mid-19th century, most states had established public school systems.
However, these systems were often segregated, with separate schools for white and black
students. In 1896, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson that racial
segregation in public schools was constitutional, as long as the facilities were "equal."
In the 20th century, there was a growing movement for civil rights, including the right to equal
education. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Brown v. Board of Education that
racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. The Court held that "separate
educational facilities are inherently unequal."

In addition to the fight for racial equality in education, there were also other important
developments in educational rights in the 20th century. In 1975, the Education for All
Handicapped Children Act, now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA), was passed. IDEA guarantees a free and appropriate public education to all children
with disabilities.

In 1994, the No Child Left Behind Act was passed. NCLB was a major overhaul of federal
education law. It required all states to develop standardized tests in reading and math and to hold
schools accountable for student performance on these tests.
NCLB was controversial, but it did lead to increased focus on educational accountability. In
2015, NCLB was replaced by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). ESSA gives states more
flexibility in designing their education systems, but it still maintains a focus on accountability.

The fight for educational rights is ongoing. There are still many disparities in the quality of
education that students receive, depending on their race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and
disability status. However, the United States has made significant progress in ensuring that all
students have access to a quality education.

15
Here is a timeline of some of the key milestones in the historical development of educational
rights in the United States:

1642: Massachusetts Bay Colony passes the first law requiring all children to be educated.

1837: Horace Mann publishes his report on public education in Massachusetts, which helps to
spark a national movement for free public education.

1852: California becomes the first state to establish a free public school system.

1896: Supreme Court rules in Plessy v. Ferguson that racial segregation in public schools is
constitutional, as long as the facilities are "equal."

1954: Supreme Court rules in Brown v. Board of Education that racial segregation in public
schools is unconstitutional.

1964: Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in education on the basis of race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin.

1965: Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 provides federal funding to support
schools in low-income areas and prohibits discrimination in education on the basis of race, color,
national origin, or sex.

1975: Education for All Handicapped Children Act (now known as IDEA) is passed,
guaranteeing a free and appropriate public education to all children with disabilities.

1994: No Child Left Behind Act is passed, requiring states to develop standardized tests in
reading and math and to hold schools accountable for student performance on these tests.

2015: Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) replaces NCLB, giving states more flexibility in
designing their education systems

16
Part-3
Basics of right to education

3.1 Right to education as fundamental right

The right to education is a fundamental human right that is enshrined in international law and in
the constitutions of many countries. It is the right of every person to have access to quality
education, regardless of their race, gender, religion, social status, or any other factor. Education
is essential for human development and well-being. It empowers individuals to reach their full
potential and to contribute to society in meaningful ways. Education also helps to reduce
poverty, promote equality, and promote peace and understanding between cultures.

In 2002, India amended its constitution to make education a fundamental right for all children
between the ages of 6 and 14. This right is guaranteed under Article 21A of the Constitution of
India.

The right to education is a fundamental human right that is enshrined in international law and in
the constitutions of many countries. Education is essential for human development and well-
being. It empowers individuals to reach their full potential and to contribute to society in
meaningful ways. India has made significant progress in ensuring that all children have access to
elementary education, but there are still some challenges that need to be addressed. The right to
education is a powerful tool for social change and economic development. It is important to
invest in education in order to build a better future for all.

3.2 legal frame work in India

The Indian Constitution does not categorize social rights as justiciable fundamental rights but as
Directive Principles of government policy.7Despite this fact, the Indian judiciary has been
innovative in its enforcement of social rights, namely with the Supreme Court of India, defining
7
Durda Das Basu, commentry on the constitution of India 311-12 (5th ed. 1965). See P. Chandrasekhar Rao, The
constitution of India and international law 125 (Ko Swan Sik ed., 1993) (quoting A.B.S.K. Sangh (Rly.) v. Union of
India, A.I.R. 1981 S.C. 298, 335) (holding that “Directive Principles should serve the Courts as a code of
interpretation” rather than as enforceable, justiciable rights).

17
the most fundamental provision, the right to a dignified life, in Article 21 of the Constitution and
tucking this right into most of the internationally recognized human rights. 8 Human rights in the
Indian Constitution are divided into two separate parts. Part III of the Indian Constitution
includes “Fundamental Rights,” which includes the right to life, equality and free speech, and
basic first generation civil and political rights.9 These fundamental rights are justiciable under the
Constitution. Part IV includes the Directive Principles of State Policy which include social and
economic rights, such as the right to livelihood, health, and free primary education. A Directive
Principle is the articulation of economic and social rights within the Constitution that help
central, state and local governments form their policies that cannot be judicially enforced. In the
past forty years, the Indian Supreme Court has tied these two different parts of the Constitution,
and types of rights, together by associating so and economic rights with the right to life and
accordingly implementing a broad interpretation of civil and political rights.

3.3 legal frame work in united state

The U.S. Constitution does not explicitly mention a right to education, 10 and the Supreme Court
has declined to recognize a fundamental federal right to education. 11 The concept of fundamental
rights is a relatively new concept in American constitutional law. 12 Today, the Supreme Court
recognizes fundamental rights as those rights which are rooted in the nation’s
history and traditions.13 Despite claims that the right to education is a fundamental right that is
well-established in the nation’s history and traditions,14 the Supreme Court refuses to
recognize a fundamental right to education, instead acknowledging a right to educational
opportunity.15 While there is no recognized fundamental right at the federal level, many state
8
Upendra Baxi, Taking Suffering Seriously: Social Action Litigation in the Supreme Court of India, 4 Third world
Legal Stud. 107, 108 (1985), available at http://scholar.valpo.edu/twls/vol4/iss1/6.
9
Constitution of India. Part III.
10
See generally U.S. Constituion.
11
San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973).
12
Henne v. Wright, 904 F.2d 1208, 1214 (8th Cir. 1990). See Meyer v.
Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 401 (1923) (first usage by the Court of the term fundamental rights).
13
Areto Imoukhuede, The Fifth Freedom: The Constitutional Duty to Provide Public Education, 22 U. FLA. J.L. &
PUB. POL’Y 45, 54 (2011); Derek
Black, Unlocking the Power of State Constitutions With Equal Protection: The
First Step Toward Education as a Federally Protected Right, 51 WM. & MARY
L. REV. 1343, 1409-10 (2010).
14
Imoukhuede Black at 1049-10.
15
Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

18
constitutions recognize a right to education.16

Most constitutional rights in the U.S. are negative rights, 17 in the sense that they are rights that
the state offers no affirmative guarantee to pursue or achieve, but instead that state offers a right
to not take away or protect the right. A good example is the right to free speech. The government
does not need to affirmatively act to implement the right; instead, it needs to
protect against infringements on the right. While positive rights have achieved recognition in
international law and in the constitutions of other countries,18they are generally not
formally recognized in the interpretative constitutional law of the United States. 19 As Goodwin
Liu, has observed, “the idea that our Constitution guarantees affirmative rights to social
and economic welfare has for some time been out of fashion.” 20 Nevertheless, arguments for
recognizing at least a child’s developmental right to education have been brought in American
courts.21 Children’s fundamental interest in education has been highlighted in cases brought by
children against school authorities under many constitutional provisions, including the First
Amendment and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.22 None of these approaches has
ever resulted in the Supreme Court recognizing a fundamental right to education. However, there

16
Roger J.R. Levesque, The Right to Education in the United States: Beyond the Limits of the Lore and the Lure of
the Law, 4 ANN. SURV. INT’L & COMP. L. 205, 2016-18 (1997), available at http://digitalcommons.law.
ggu.edu/annlsurvey/vol4/iss1/10.
17
Darby, supra note 19, at 355-356
18
Mark Tushnet, Weak Courts, Strong Rights: Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in comparative
constitutional law (2008) (examining judicial enforcement of socioeconomic rights from comparative law
perspectives)
19
Darby, see Frank Michelman, Socioeconomic Rights in Constitutional Law: Explaining America Away, 6 INT’L J.
CONST. L. 663 (2008) (offering explanations for why American constitutional law has not recognized socio-
economic rights to the same degree as other countries);
see also Goodwin Liu, Education, Equality and National Citizenship, 116 YALE L.J. 330, 336-7 (2006).
20
Anne Dailey, Children’s Constitutional Rights, MINN. L. REV. 2099, 2168 (2011) (quoting Goodwin Liu, Rethinking
Constitutional Welfare Rights, STAN. L. REV. 203, 204 (2008))
21
Bethel Sch. Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 683 (1986) (examining “[t]he process of educating youth for
citizenship in public schools”); Ambach v. Norwick, 441 U.S. 68, 76 (1979) (“[T]he importance of public schools in
the preparation of individuals for participation as citizens long has been recognized.”); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406
U.S. 205. 221 (1972) (“[S]ome degree of education is necessary to prepare citizens to participate effectively and
intelligently in our political system if we are to preserve freedom and independence.”); Amy Gutmann, Children,
Paternalism, and Education: A Liberal Argument, 9 PHIL. & PUB. AFF. 338, 349 (1980)
(“[A] child’s right to compulsory education is a precondition to becoming a rational human being and a full citizen
of a liberal democratic society.”)
22
Dailey, supra note 58, at 2171–72 (citing Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S.
390, 403 (1923), in which the Court considered whether a statute prohibiting instruction in a foreign language
violated the Fourteenth Amendment.).

19
has been extensive recognition of the right to access education via the federal executive 23 as well
as education rights related litigation at the state level.

3.4 Legal Interpretation Case Laws

INDIA

India, the world’s largest democracy, possesses a well developed judicial system and has a
history of constitutional rights litigation relating to the promotion of social rights, and
specifically, the right to education.24 However, India is still a developing country with resource
limitations. Unlike America, India has articulated and recognized the right to education but faces
obstacles in implementation of its progressive realization of the remedy universal primary
schooling.

Case Law

INDIA

Mohini Jain v. State of Karanataka

In the 1990s, the Indian courts began to expand their jurisdiction to address an increasingly
diverse range of issues and rights and to address social rights more aggressively. In 1992, the
Supreme Court of India held that education was a fundamental right in Mohini Jain v. State of
Karnataka.25 The case examined whether private medical colleges in Karnataka could charge a

23
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Pub. L. No. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, 252 (codified at 42 USCS passim) (“No
person shall, on the grounds of be excluded from any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”);
see also Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974.
U.S.C. & 1703 (2006) (“No State shall deny equal educational opportunity to an individual on account of his or her
race.”); No Child Left Behind Act of
2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 1001, 115 Stat. 1425, 1440 (2002) (addressing educational access rights of children
with limited English proficiency).
24
Philip Alston & Nehal Bhuta, Human Rights and Development towards mutual reinforcement 250 (Philip Alston
and Mary Robinson eds., 2005) (citing Burt Neuborne, The Supreme Court of India, 1 INT’L J. OF
Constitution L. 476 (2003); see also Unni Krishnan, (1) S.C.R. 594.
25
Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, (1992) 3 S.C.R. 658 (India), available at
http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=12349.

20
“capitation fee,” for certain students with the fee serving as additional consideration for
admission of less capable students. The medical colleges argued that higher tuition could be
charged to students who were less qualified. The Supreme Court examined the treatment of
“meritorious” and “non-meritorious” students as an equality-based challenge and struck down
the capitation fees as an illegal violation of students’ educational rights.

In its analysis, the Court examined whether Article 21 included a right to education and whether
the fee system set up by the medical colleges violated that right. The Court held that the “right to
education flows directly from the right to life,” which included the right to live with dignity. The
Court linked concepts of life and dignity to education by holding that it was impossible to live a
dignified life without being. educated, and that life could not be fully appreciated and enjoyed
unless a citizen was educated and conscious of his individualistic dignity.26
In Mohini Jain, the Court exhibited its willingness to connect social and economic rights with
civil and political rights in order to achieve desired legal outcomes of greater rights recognition.
The anchoring of less-defined social and economic rights to civil and political rights innovatively
broadened the national rights obligation framework. The Indian judiciary was able to bolster
social and economic rights and make and set the national agenda for education reform.
Comparatively, this approach was taken up by the American judiciary particularly in Brown, but
only achieved temporary permanence and success.

Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh

In 1993, the Supreme Court revisited the decision in Mohini Jain through Unni Krishnan v. State
of Andhra Pradesh.27 Unni Krishnan, like Mohini Jain, challenged the ability of professional
schools in Andhra Pradesh to charge “capitation” fees from admission-seeking students. The
Supreme Court again held that the right to education is a fundamental right which flows from
Article 21 and declared the right to free primary education to be a fundamental right. While
upholding the fundamentality of education, Unni Krishnan partly overruled Mohini Jain and
narrowed the applicability of the remedy-finding that the right to free education was only
available to children age fourteen and under, and subsequently India’s obligation to provide
further education would be subject to economic capacity and development limits. The Court then
outlined the contours of the right to education through the parameters of the Directive Principles
from Article IV of the Indian Constitution. To understand the outer limit of the right granted, the
Court discussed the limitations of available resources and Directive Principles Articles 41 and
45. Article 41 provided that the State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity, make
effective provisions to secure the right to work and to education. Article 45 provided the State

26
Stating “The right to life under Article 21 and the dignity of an individual cannot be assured unless it is
accompanied by the right to education.”
27
Unni Krishnan, J.P. & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. AIR 1993 SC 2178

21
shall endeavor to provide, within a period of ten years from the commencement of the
Constitution, free and compulsory education for all citizens under fourteen years of age.28
Unni Krishnan was groundbreaking in two respects. First, the Court created a basis for a social
right to be considered fundamental by characterizing of the right (to education) as “necessary”
for the fulfillment of the right to life. Using this analysis, the Court was able to breathe life into a
social right and make it fundamental, in effect, by stating that social rights were “as important”
as civil and political rights and certainly necessary for the exercise of civil and political rights.
To this end, the Court states “free and compulsory education under Article 45 is certainly as
important as freedom of religion under Article 25. Freedom from starvation is as important as the
right to life.”

Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India 29

The case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1997) 10 SCC 549 is a landmark case of
the Supreme Court of India in which the Court held that the right to education is a fundamental
right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, even for children who are working or forced
to work.
The Supreme Court agreed with Bandhua Mukti Morcha and held that the right to education is a
fundamental right for all children, regardless of their social or economic status. The Court also
held that the government has a duty to ensure that all children have access to quality education.
The Supreme Court agreed with Bandhua Mukti Morcha and held that the right to education is a
fundamental right for all children, regardless of their social or economic status. The Court also
held that the government has a duty to ensure that all children have access to quality education.
The Bandhua Mukti Morcha case has had a significant impact on the right to education in India.
It has helped to ensure that all children, including children from marginalized groups, have
access to education. The case has also been cited by courts in other countries to support the right
to education as a fundamental right.

TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka 30

This case is a landmark judgement that has given answers to plenty of questions regarding the
minorities rights and government regulations in the administration of educational institutions.
TMA PAI foundation v State of Karnataka give light on how article 29(2) apply to article 30(1).
Dr. T.M.A Pai established an academic institution called ‘The Academy of General Education,’
which was founded as an organization under the Societies Registration Act,1860 in Manipal,
which was in the state of Madras at the time, but became a part of the state of Karnataka after the
states were recognized. The governor of the state adopted a law called the Karnataka Educational
28
Article 45 exemplifies a deadline for progressive realization of a right.
29
Bandu Mukti Morcha v. Union of India AIR 802, 1984 SCR (2) 67
30
TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka AIR (2002) 8 SCC 481

22
Institutions Ordinance, 1984 under the restriction of the capital charge to forbid the unethical
collection of the fee in excessive amounts. A writ petition was filed challenging the legitimacy of
the above-mentioned law and the state government’s directive dated 19.07.1984 limiting the total
intake of college and allocating 40% of the seats as government seats. During the time that the
petition was pending, Karnataka Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee)
Act,1984 was passed that set the rates of capitation and tuition fees for private unaided (not
taking any assistance from the government) educational institutions. The college in question was
classified as a private unaided educational institution because it received no financial assistance
from the state government.
In this case, an 11 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court decided the scope of right of minorities to
establish and administer educational institutions of their choice under Article 30(1) read with
Article 29(2) of the Constitution. The majority opinion delivered by 6 Judges held that only the
State can determine the status of a religious or linguistic minority and religious and linguistic
minorities, who have been put on a par in Article 30, have to be considered State-wise. However,
the right under Article 30(1) cannot be such as to override the national interest or to prevent the
Government from framing regulations and any regulation framed in the national interest must
necessarily apply to all educational institutions, whether run by the majority or the minority.
Such a limitation must necessarily be read into Article 30. Government regulations cannot
destroy the minority character of the institution or make the right to establish and administer a
mere illusion.

Champakam Dorairajan v. State of Madras31

The case of Champakam Dorairajan v. State of Madras (1951) AIR 1951 SC 226 is a landmark
case of the Supreme Court of India in which the Court held that the right to education is a
fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
There was a quota system in place for college entrance in Madras in 1950. Four medical
institutions and four engineering colleges were supported by the state. Non-Brahmins were
allotted six seats for every fourteen seats available, This was based on the Communal
Government Order issued by the Province of Madras or Madras Presidency in 1927, just before
independence (Communal G. O.). Reservations based on a person’s caste were used to admit
people to government universities and employment.
The State of Madras claimed that they were allowed to keep and enforce the Communal
Government Order because it was established under Article 46 of the Directive Principles of
State Policy to promote the educational interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, an other
weaker sections of society. Shrimathi Champakam Dorairajan, a Brahmin, filed a suit in the
Madras High Court under Article 226 alleging that her basic right to admission to the college had
been violated. She said that despite her good grades, she was unable to gain entrance to the
Medical College.

31
AIR (1951) SC 226.

23
State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan is a historic Supreme Court of India decision (AIR
1951 SC 226). India’s Constitution was altered with the First Amendment as a result of this
ruling. It was the Republic of India’s first major reservation decision. The Supreme Court upheld
the verdict of the Madras High Court, which overturned a Government Order (G.O.) issued in the
[Madras Presidency] in 1927.

USA
Brown v. Board of Education32
Brown v. Board of Education, in full Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, case in which, on
May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously (9–0) that racial segregation in public
schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits the states from
denying equal protection of the laws to any person within their jurisdictions. The decision
declared that separate educational facilities for white and African American students were
inherently unequal. It thus rejected as inapplicable to public education the “separate but equal”
doctrine, , according to which laws mandating separate public facilities for whites and African
Americans do not violate the equal protection clause if the facilities are approximately equal.
Although the 1954 decision strictly applied only to public schools, it implied that segregation
was not permissible in other public facilities. Considered one of the most important rulings in the
Court’s history, Brown v. Board of Education helped inspire the American civil rights movement
of the late 1950s and ’60s.

San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez33

In Texas, public schools were financed primarily through a system whereby property taxes were
imposed by local school districts. Because property values were higher in some districts, than in
others, substantial disparities across districts in per pupil spending arose. The disparities in
spending among public school children triggered a Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection
challenge to the constitutionality of the system.
The Supreme Court is limiting the extent to which fundamental rights can be found under the
United States Constitution. The Supreme Court is saying that in order for a fundamental right to
be recognizable under Fourteenth Amendment due process jurisprudence, it must be determined
that such a right is explicitly or implicitly guaranteed by the Constitution. The fact that a function
performed by the government is important does not establish such a function as a fundamental
right. The primary focus of this case is on what standard of review should apply or why the
rational basis test is the proper standard of review here

32
Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1953)
33
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez U.S. 1 (1973)

24
Engel v. Vitale 34
Legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 25, 1962, that voluntary prayer in
public schools violated the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment prohibition of a state
establishment of religion.
The Engel v. Vitale case of 1962 revolved around the practice of non-denominational school
prayer in New York public schools during the 1950s. This case played a pivotal role in defining
the constitutional boundaries between government and religion in the United States. The
Supreme Court's 6-1 decision affirmed that the state's involvement in composing and endorsing
the prayer violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits
government interference with religion. The Court's ruling underscored the importance of
maintaining a clear separation between government and religious activities to protect individuals'
religious freedoms and ensure the neutrality of the state in matters of faith. This case serves as a
landmark precedent in the ongoing debate over the relationship between government and religion
in the United States.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District35

The Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District case of 1969 was a
significant landmark in the realm of students' rights and free speech within the public school
system. The case revolved around the suspension of three students for wearing black armbands
as a symbol of peaceful protest against the Vietnam War. The Supreme Court's ruling established
that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate. The Court recognized
the armbands as a form of symbolic speech, protected by the First Amendment, and stated that
students have fundamental rights which the State must respect, both in and out of school. This
decision emphasized that unless there are constitutionally valid reasons to regulate students'
speech, they are entitled to express their views freely. The Tinker case continues to be a key
precedent in discussions regarding the rights of students in public schools and the boundaries of
free speech.

Part-4
Comparative analysis of legal provisions.

34
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)
35
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District U.S. 503 (1969)

25
4.1 Comparative Assessment
Comparative study of education between different countries helps in providing an idea of
successful experiences and unsuccessful experiences of the countries and shows the loophole and
leakages in governing the administration of education. The study of the education system of
different countries is very helpful in improvement of an education system and gives the advanced
idea of making solving regional and national problems. This paper gives the concept of the
education scheme and the laws that are in place for the education scheme in nations such as India
and the USA. In the research I have given an understanding of how India and the United States
have structured their education system. Education is a pillar that, unless a nation or society is
educated, can attain its objectives or purposes over the required period, linked to all kinds of
nation growth. It is therefore essential for us all to make the individuals of a nation conscious of
the advantages of schooling

4.1.1 Decoding the Indian Education System

The official public-school system starts with Primary School. A child has to complete 5 years to
go to Primary School (1st Class to 5th Class). After primary school, the child has to go to Upper
Primary & Secondary School (6th to 10th). After Secondary School (SSC), the students go to
Junior College (1st & 2nd Year Intermediate i.e. 11th and 12th). After Junior College, students
go to Degree College (3 Years), PG (2 Years), Ph.D and Post-Doctoral. Unlike the US, students
in India chose their Courses not by interest, but on the basis of job opportunities available in the
market. For example, if there are more job prospects in the computer field, most of them run for
computer courses, burying their interest which they had in other subjects. Thus, people in India
have to suppress their interests or develop them personally on their own. Moreover, in India in
most of the Universities/ Colleges there are no Campus jobs.

4.1.2 The American Education System: Structure

The official public-school system starts with Kindergarten. In most states, a child has to
complete 5 years to go to Kindergarten. After Kindergarten, child has to go 1st grade, then 2nd
grade and so on until 12th grade. Some public schools offer a Pre-Kindergarten as well. This is
not a formal education level. In some schools, Pre-Kindergarten is meant for poor children,

26
homeless kids, kids who cannot speak English etc. The pre- kindergarten is generally meant to
prepare the backward children to get ready for formal education next year. After 12th grade, UG
(4 years), MS (PG - 2 Years), Ph.D. and Post- Doctoral.

On the contrary to India, in US no one would say that I am interested only in a particular Course.
Generally, all people have some interests in different areas like music, dance, physics,
economics, history, geography, psychology, philosophy, astronomy, etc. In US, they can take a
few courses in the areas in which they are interested – which facilitates "learning what you want
to". All people would not run behind a few particular courses. Unlike this, in India most of the
people are mad of doing a few particular courses like medicine or engineering. In US, bright
people are spread out in different majors (Courses) and brightness is rooted in interest and not as
a necessity. In the US, effort is made to make a course easy to the student i.e. student concerns
are considered while designing the course, because of the philosophy of not to unnecessary
trouble a person. This might lead to easier undergraduate courses. Since they have choice of
course selections at least as early as the 9th grade - so many people don't take all fundamental
courses - some people avoid courses they hate like math, geography etc. This is a demerit in US
education system.

4.2 Right to education – comparative analysis

Education in the United States is provided by public and private schools. Public education is
universally available, with control and funding coming from state, local, and federal government.
Public school curricula, funding, teaching, employment, and other policies are set through
locally elected school boards with jurisdiction over school districts. State governments have
control over educational standards and standardized tests for public school systems. Government
supported, free public schools for all started being established after the American Revolution 36,
and expanded in the 19th century, The Constitution includes human rights guarantees, but not
the right to education. Education is compulsory over an age range beginning somewhere between
ages five to eight and ending somewhere between ages sixteen to eighteen, depending on the
state. This requirement can be satisfied by educating children in public schools, state-certified

36
The American Revolution was an ideological and political revolution that generally occurred in British America
between 1765 and 1783.

27
private schools, or an approved home school program. In most schools, education is divided into
three levels: elementary school, middle or junior high school, and high school. Children are
usually divided by age groups into grades, ranging from kindergarten and first grade for the
youngest children, up to twelfth grade as the final year of high school. Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Education in India is provided by the public sector as well as the private sector, with control
and funding coming from three levels: central, state, and local. The Indian government
lays emphasis on primary education up to the age of fourteen years, referred to as elementary
education in India. Education has also been made free for children for 6 to 14 years of age or up
to class VIII under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 37. The
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act or Right to Education Act (RTE), is an
Indian legislation enacted by the Parliament of India on 4 August 2009, which describes the
modalities of the importance of free and compulsory education for children between 6 and 14 in
India under Article 21a38 of the Indian Constitution. India became one of 135 countries to make
education a fundamental right of every child when the act came into force on 1 April 2010. It
requires all private schools to reserve 25% of seats to children. The RTE Act is the first
legislation in the world that puts the responsibility of ensuring enrolment, attendance and
completion on the Government.

Part-5

37
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act or Right to Education Act (RTE) is an Act of the
Parliament of India enacted on 4 August 2009, which describes the modalities of the importance of free and
compulsory education for children between the age of 6 to 14 years in India under Article 21A of the Indian
Constitution.
38
Right to Education - Article 21(A): This article says state shall provide free and compulsory education to all
children of the age of six to fourteen years.

28
 Conclusion and suggestions
5.1 Conclusion
Education remained a neglected area of state policy with universalization of elementary
education continuing to be a distant goal. Efforts from educationists, academics and civil society
groups that focused on a rights-based approach finally yielded results in 2002, when the 86th
constitutional amendment39 was passed by parliament and Article 21A, which makes right to
education a fundamental right, was included in the constitution. In doing so, it put the Right to
Education on par with the Right to Life stated in Article 21. Article 21 A states: “the state shall
provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of 6 to 14 years as the state may,
by law determine”.

The RTE Act40 also aims at reaching to the unreached and disadvantaged groups with providing
specific provision of Free and Compulsory Education for every child who is above six years of
age and has not yet been admitted to any school or though admitted, could not complete his or
her education, then, he or she shall be admitted in a class appropriate to his or her age. To
accomplish this task there is a provision in RTE Act for Special Training for such children in
order to be at par with others. With all its aims, vision mission we can say that Right to education
act is the act for future.

To conclude, the flexibility of U.S education system is its greatest strength. The flexibility allows
the students to know better of themselves regarding their talent, capabilities and interest, which is
hard to find in Indian education system. Thus, US education system is freedom oriented and
Indian system is forced. In India, all the decisions are taken by parents and they are not allowed
to think independently. Hence, flexibility should be allowed. There is a need to promote the
'creativity' in Indian education. Graduate programs in the US are far ahead of most other
countries due to the critical mass they have and the fact that they attract the best students and
faculty from all over the world. In spite of many good things in US education system, one must
be careful regarding the youth are being more obsessed towards sex, alcohol, drugs, violence,

39
The Eighty-sixth Amendment of the Constitution of India, provides Right to Education for the age of six to
fourteen years and Early childhood care until the age of six. It has inserted Article 21A (Right to Education as a
Fundamental Right) & replaces Article 45 (Early Childhood Education) of Directive principles of State policy and
amended Article 51A (Fundamental Duties) to add new duty of parents for providing education to his child between
the age of six and fourteen years.
40
The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act or Right to Education Act (RTE ) is an Act of
the Parliament of India enacted on 4 August 2009, which describes the modalities of the importance of free and

29
etc. in USA, because India is taking up western culture very fast and once this culture occupy
India, it will not take much time to ruin the education and culture.

Education remained a neglected area of state policy with universalization of elementary

education continuing to be a distant goal. Efforts from educationists, academics and civil society
groups that focused on a rights based approach finally yielded results in 2002, when the
86th constitutional amendment was passed by parliament and Article 21A, which makes
right to education a fundamental right, was included in the constitution. In doing so, it put
the Right to Education on par with the Right to Life stated in Article 21. Article 21 A states:
“the state shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of 6 to 14 years 41
as the state may, by law determine”

Suggestions

suggestions are follows:

 The process should be started by the central and state consultation processes for state
property, since schooling is an issue on the simultaneous list.
 A model should be laid down to implement each government's right to education to

bring greater transparency into the education system.

 The Center and State governments should make efforts to put kids under the age of 6 and
adults under the age of 14 under the provisions of this act.
 There is urgent need of review of curriculum and changes in textbooks of the schools for
enhancement of the level of education with actual learning of the students.
 Infringement in article 19(1) might be called into question the constitutional validity of
seat reservations at private colleges for economically weaker segments.

Sharing of duty to provide free and compulsory education between Centre" and state authority
may lead to neither authority being held accountable. There must be some accountability on
behalf of authority who regulated the duty and fulfills the obligation regarding this act.

41
compulsory education for children between the age of 6 to 14 years in India under Article 21A of the
constitution of India.

30
 Bibliography

I. Printed sources
1. Books
 International and Comparative Education: Contemporary Issues and Debates"
by Kathy Bickmore, Ruth Hayhoe, and Caroline Manathunga
 Comparative Education: The Dialectic of the Global and the Local" by Robert
F. Arnove and Philip G. Altbach

2. Articles
 Upendra Jeph, University of Rajasthan Comparative Analysis of educational
right in INDIA and USA Volume V Issue I / ISSN: 2582-8878
 Mohammad Rasikh Wasiq Student of LLM (International Law) ILS Law
College, Pune on A Comparative analysis of child Right to Education In India,
Germany and the United State.
 Ketki Tara Kumaiyan on Comparative Analysis of Right To Education Across
the world
 Ashley Feasley-atholic University of America, Columbus School of Law on
Recognizing Education Rights in India and the United States: All
Roads Lead to the Courts? Volume 26 Issue 2 Fall 2014
 Ms. Shelly Bhatnagar, DR. Satish Gill, shiv college of education, Tigaon
faridabad on Right to education: Comparative Analysis of Different Countries

II. Electronic Sources

1. Webliography
 https://www.unesco.org/gem-report/en
 https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education
 https://www.britannica.com/search?
query=San+Antonio+Independent+School+District+v.+Rodriguez
 https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/21
 https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-7055-case-analysis-unni-
krishnan-j-p-v-s-state-of-andhra-pradesh.html

31