right to education and minority institutions
supreme court has upheld the right to education act.
so far so good
but minority institutions are exempted.
and it is not necessary for them to teach in medium of mother tongue.
the choice is left to parents.
.whom do these decisions affect?
it is well known that there are minority institutions which are so in name only.
actually the minority institutions, envisaged originally were those which catered to their members from the minority community.
but is it so?
many of these institutions are commercial enterprises who masquerade as minority institutions.
take convent of m & j.
it is exempted from the act being minority institution.
but who gets his ward admitted?
only the rich and the influential.
who want to maintain their ascendancy in the society.
they have the monopoly of laying down rules for who is of what rank in society.
their ruling language is english.
hence their commitment to use english as medium of instruction.
which will give them advantage in advancing in society
in accordance with the rules they themselves lay down.
the judgment may be legally correct but is it fair?
are the lesser endowed families who cannot get admission to m& j not condemned to be lower in status.
no genuine minority institution teaches in english medium
mother tongue or the home language is used
all their students are from backward community
they have no need of reservation for weaker sections.
we talk of equality before law when it suits us
we talk of individual choices when it suits us
we talk of backwardness when it suits us
we talk of international lingua franca when it suits us
we ignore all these when they do not suit us.
but we must keep our exalted position in society
every argument is good for this.
and the majority has no say in the matter
because the court willed it so.
.think over it