The Bombay High Court has issued an interim order preventing the Maharashtra state authorities from deploying teachers of private unaided and minority schools for the ongoing census activities. The ruling was made in response to a petition filed by multiple educational associations, including the Unaided Schools Forum, challenging the state’s directive.
Judicial Ruling and Interim Relief
A Division Bench, comprising Justices Gautam A. Ankhad and Sandesh D. Patil, determined that, based on a preliminary examination, teachers from these institutions are not legally obligated to participate in census duties as per the Census Act and associated rules. Consequently, the court granted interim relief, effectively preventing over 500 schools across Maharashtra from being compelled to allocate their teaching staff for such duties.
The bench emphasized the potential negative impact on academic activities, noting, “The material placed on record indicates that substantial teaching staff attached to several schools have been requisitioned for census duties. This will disrupt the regular academic activities and impair the right of students to uninterrupted education.” As a result, the court issued a stay on any notices or appointment orders that mandated teachers’ participation in the census, along with any coercive measures for non-compliance.
Pending Final Hearing
The court has also prohibited the issuance of new orders requiring these teachers to engage in census activities until the matter is resolved in a final hearing scheduled for July 31, 2026. The interim order stresses that the census could be effectively conducted through governmental bodies, local authorities, or aided institutions, as envisaged by existing statutory provisions.
Petitioners’ and Respondents’ Arguments
Senior advocate Venkatesh Dhond, representing the petitioners, argued that neither the Census Act nor its rules mandate private institutions to provide their staff for census duties. He highlighted that, in some cases, nearly the entire teaching faculty was drafted, such as St. John’s School in Mumbai, where all 133 teachers were appointed as census officers. Such extensive deployment, the petitioners contended, severely disrupts academic operations and infringes upon students’ right to education.
Countering the petitioners’ claims, Government Pleader Anjali Helekar underscored the extensive nature of the census, describing it as a significant administrative and statistical undertaking that necessitates broad participation. She noted that teachers are compensated with an honorarium in addition to their salaries and that many schools are closed for summer break during this period. Helekar further cited the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which permits the use of teachers for census tasks.
Senior advocate Rajshekhar Govilkar, appearing for the Director of Census Operations, referenced the Census Rules, suggesting that teachers, clerks, or any officials might be appointed as census enumerators. Nevertheless, the court observed that the current legal framework does not explicitly obligate private unaided and minority schools to deploy their staff for such duties.
The court has reserved judgment on whether the state’s action was justified under its authority to assign census duties, leaving this issue open for determination at the final hearing.
