PolitySocial Justice
News 7 of 28

Supreme Court to Hear Plea Against Coaching Raj, Dummy School Nexus Under Article 21A

Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCTeachingSSC GAPrelims HighMains HighStatic GK Link
03 Jul 2026
~2 min
Source: The Hindu
Key Data:14–16 hours daily coachingArticle 21AJEE, NEET, CLAT, CUET, SSCNTA, CBSE, NCERT, NMC, IIT Council, Bar Council of India, Staff Selection Commission
Bodies:Supreme CourtNational Testing AgencyCBSENCERTNational Medical CommissionIIT CouncilBar Council of IndiaStaff Selection Commission
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.Supreme Court to hear plea against coaching raj and dummy school nexus, alleging constitutional violation of right to education.

2.Petitioner argues the system creates state-manufactured inequality where only those who can afford coaching succeed in entrance exams.

3.Demands include dismantling unregulated coaching ecosystem and aligning JEE, NEET, CLAT, CUET, SSC with state-prescribed school syllabus.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · High

A petition in the Supreme Court challenges the 'coaching raj' and 'dummy school' nexus, arguing it creates a two-tier education system violating Article 21A. The court is set to hear the plea seeking alignment of entrance exams with school syllabus and dismantling of unregulated coaching factories.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Daily Coaching Hours Alleged14-16 hours
Constitutional Article CitedArticle 21A (Right to Education)
Key Entrance Exams MentionedJEE, NEET, CLAT, CUET, SSC
Respondent Bodies NamedNTA, CBSE, NCERT, NMC, IIT Council, BCI, SSC

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Daily Coaching Hours Alleged: 14-16 hours
  • ›Constitutional Article Cited: Article 21A (Right to Education)
  • ›Target this Data: 14-16 hours per day children confined in coaching centres
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: National Testing Agency (NTA) – respondent in the plea
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Article 21A (Right to Education) – cited in the petition

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Which constitutional article is cited in the Supreme Court petition concerning the right to education and dummy schools?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements regarding the Supreme Court petition on coaching raj:

1. The petition was filed by advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami.

2. It demands alignment of JEE, NEET, CLAT, and CUET with state-prescribed school syllabus.

3. The petition alleges that coaching centres confine children for 10-12 hours a day.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

According to the petition, how many hours per day are children allegedly confined in coaching centres under the dummy school system?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What is the primary objective of the petition filed in the Supreme Court regarding coaching centres and dummy schools?

All 20 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

CBSE 3-Language Policy: SC Informed of Implementation Plan for Class 9 Students

The Supreme Court is reviewing the CBSE's new policy making three languages, including at least two Indian languages, compulsory for Class 9 students. The Centre has informed the court it is working on an implementation plan, addressing concerns about student pressure and infrastructure. This is a key test of the National Education Policy 2020's implementation in schools.

Health & Education Current Affairs

CBSE Mandates Two Bhartiya Bhashas Under NEP 2020 Three-Language Formula from Class 6 (2026-27)

CBSE schools from the 2026-27 academic session must offer two Indian languages (Bhartiya Bhashas) as R2 and R3 under NEP 2020's three-language formula. However, practical roadblocks like teacher shortages, limited language options, and transition issues for existing students threaten effective implementation, with Hindi and Sanskrit becoming default third languages.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Rules NCSC Cannot Issue Binding Directions Under Article 338

The Supreme Court clarified that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) has only recommendatory and advisory powers under Article 338, not adjudicatory powers. It cannot issue binding orders in service disputes. This ruling sets boundaries for constitutional commissions under Articles 338, 338A, and 338B.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognisance of Delhi-NCR Sexual Assaults, Cites Article 21 and Nirbhaya Parallel

The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognisance of recent sexual assault cases in Delhi-NCR, flagging lax patrolling and administrative failures that make public spaces 'zones of high risk'. The court invoked Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) and drew a painful parallel to the 2012 Nirbhaya case, demanding accountability and a measurable response from authorities. This has major implications for law enforcement accountability, women's safety, and judicial oversight.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Flags CBSE Three-Language Policy for Class 9 from July 2026, Cites Student Pressure & Teacher Shortage

The Supreme Court has raised concerns over the CBSE's three-language policy for Class 9 students, emphasizing the need to avoid burdening children. The Court questioned the implementation timeline, teacher availability, and the starting class, suggesting an expert committee to address issues. The policy aligns with NEP 2020.

Polity Current Affairs

SC to Examine Constitutional Validity of Treating English as Non-Indigenous Under CBSE's Three-Language Policy (NEP 2026-27)

The Supreme Court has raised a critical constitutional question: can English be classified as a 'non-indigenous' language under the CBSE's three-language policy (NEP 2026-27)? The court questioned the colonial undertones of the term 'native' and highlighted English's deep roots in Indian society, signaling a potential re-examination of language policy in education.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Landmark Judgment on Sex Work: Article 142, Consent, and Rights Framework

The Supreme Court in May 2026 delivered a landmark judgment on sex work, holding that consenting adult sex workers cannot be forcibly rescued and affirming their constitutional rights despite social disapproval. The judgment invokes Article 142 for legal force, spans nearly 300 pages, and departs from global anti-trafficking assumptions, but raises concerns about institutional implementation and caste discrimination.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Nine-Judge Bench Revisits 'Industry' Definition: Bangalore Water Supply Case (1978) Under Scrutiny

The Supreme Court's nine-judge bench is set to rule on the definition of 'industry' under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, potentially expanding or contracting labour protections for workers in hospitals, educational institutions, and government welfare schemes. This landmark decision could impact millions of employees and reshape industrial relations law.