The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic is apparent in all employment sectors of the world with, the education department being no different. The global shutdown and other safety measures following the pandemic have adversely affected the lives of millions of school-going children around the world. In India alone, approximately 32 crore students have ceased moving schools and all educational activities in India have ceased[1]. At another end, this pandemic has also forced educational institutes to develop and utilise platform technologies that had never been employed by their establishments before. Yet, our education sector has encountered numerous challenges in transitioning from physical to digital mode of education. A significant part of the problem is the existing digital or technological divide in the country. According to a recent study, for example, only 4% of the country’s rural homes and 23% of urban households had computers and 24% had an internet connection[2]. Moreover, bigger states like Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have a lower connection rate of 20 per cent[3]. The present situation has also invited unique problems for the students, faculty and authorities alike. For students, particularly, the lack of Internet access or appropriate devices has created great hurdles in accessing education online; leading to a severe backlog in studies, increasing drop-out rates and added mental health issues.
These problems have not gone unrecognised by the governments in power. Some digital literacy programmes such as Bharat Net and PMGDISHA have been brought out to improve the status of online education in the country. However, the execution of all of these measures was ineffective. The National Education Policy (NEP), moreover, even tried to focus on internet access within six of the pillars identified by the policy. However, the policy has been widely criticised for not mention a viable implementation mechanism to follow its goals[4]. This failure, in turn, shows a divergence from the internationally recognised child’s right to education and the progressive attainment of that right on an equal footing granted under Articles 28 and 29 of the United Nations Conventions on the Right of Child. These factors, moreover, become extremely harmful for the country in the larger scheme of things. Education, by adding to the human resource base as well as adding to the overall efficiency of all other sectors in the country becomes a crucial developmental force for any society; and any backlog in this sector is bound to set back the development of the country.
At the same time, it will be interesting to note that every child between the ages of 6 to 14 years in the country is guaranteed the right to education by the Indian Constitution. This was done by placing Article 21-A in the Indian Constitution[5] into the Right to Education (RTE) Act; which simply mandates the government to provide free and compulsory education to every child aged 6-14 in the country. The phrase “obligatory education” thus imposes a duty on the Government and local governments to assist and guarantee that all children of the appropriate age group complete primary education. Prior to the amendment, RTE was found implied and follows from the right to life provided in accordance with Article 21. in Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India.[6]
Moreover, in Unnikrishnan v State of A.P[7], Article 21 provides that the child’s right to education is to be protected for it is vital for the healthy development of the child and for availing other freedoms and dignity guaranteed in the country. The limitation of internet connection, as had been expressed in the digital divide statistics, prevents a child from accessing education in a just and dignified manner. In Mohini Jain vs. Karnataka[8], it was decided that basic rights guaranteed to people under Article 21 and 19 cannot be achieved without guaranteeing the right, according to particular directives established by Articles 38[9], 39[10], 41[11] and 45[12]. Therefore, in places like Kashmir, this might create an overarching effect upon the exercise of rights under Article 19[13] and disable the children from expressing their opinions via the internet due to a complete internet shutdown. It should also be noted that digital divide-based preferential treatment is contrary to the principles of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. In any case, the Right to Education has long been recognised as one of the most important fundamental rights in the country. In the instance of Unnikrishnan, for example, RTE was considered to be a ‘social right’ and the court cited both Article 13, ICESCR and the UDHR. Any violation of the same should, therefore, be heavily punished by the law.
In Justice For All vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors[14]. the Delhi High Court stated that online education is subject to the Right to Education (RTE) Act, which means that private schools have the same responsibility and not the same voluntary or social responsibility. A bench of Judges Manmohan and Sanjeev Narula stated that, although physical classrooms are closed owing to the epidemic of COVID-19, private schools charge tuition fees on the basis of “synchronous face-to-face online instruction.” Alongside this, the bench also asked the Center and Delhi government to enable impoverished students with free computers, tablets or phones as well as internet packages to attend online lessons in the lockdown period of COVID-19. Failure to provide the same, according to the Court, amounted to discrimination on part of the institution.
While commenting upon the nature of education envisioned by the RTE Act, the bench conceded that Parliament did not foresee such an “unforeseen and unprecedented situation” while the Act was being passed. At the same time, the Courts should be allowed to interpret the RTE act’s provisions dynamically keeping in mind changing social needs and apply the statute also to new technologies such as online learning in the current pandemic situation of COVID-19. Here, the High Court further stated that the Act does not “consciously” define the term “education,” which must be used to address changes within the community, technology developments, illness outbreaks, natural disasters and a variety of predictable scenarios. “The word education is therefore not a static, but rather a developing and dynamic idea, the model, style and approach to education has changed sometimes and the model and technique of training must undergo a full revolution if universally good education is to be reached in the future;” it stated. Such cases shall go a long way in ensuring that government and private-run educational institutes are able to provide education to their pupils in a more fair and justiciable manner.
[1] Pravat Kumar Jena, Impact of Pandemic COVID-19 on Education in India, 12 International Journal of Current Research (IJCR) 1 (2021)
[2] Subhashree Das, Digital divide biggest scourge in online study, Daily Pioneer, 2021, https://www.dailypioneer.com/2020/state-editions/digital-divide-biggest-scourge-in-online-study.html (last visited Jul 7, 2021)
[3] Business Standard, Kerala top Indian state in broadband speed, 2021, https://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/kerala-top-indian-state-in-broadband-speed-110012800022_1.html (last visited Jul 7, 2021)
[4]Disha Nawani, NEP 2020 fails those trapped in vicious cycles of disadvantage, The Indian Express, 2021, https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/national-education-policy-2020-nep-6609564/ (last visited Jul 7, 2021)
[5] INDIAN CONST. art 21-A
[6] Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India & Ors. (1997) 10 SCC 549
[7] (1993) AIR 2178.
[8] (1991) AIR 858.
[9] INDIAN CONST. art 38
[10] INDIAN CONST. art 39
[11] INDIAN CONST. art 41
[12] INDIAN CONST. art 45
[13] INDIAN CONST. art 19
[14] Justice For All vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors W.P.(C), 3004 of 2020
