Interpretive Principles in Reading the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW Statute Law Review Pub Date : 2020-07-25 DOI:10.1093/slr/hmaa013
Sushant Chandra
{"title":"Interpretive Principles in Reading the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009","authors":"Sushant Chandra","doi":"10.1093/slr/hmaa013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as RTE Act) enacted by the Indian Parliament in 2009 has been a kernel of constitutional controversies. There are spate of controversies emerging from polemical provisions under the RTE Act. In this article, the rabid principle slating out free education for children for economically weaker section and disadvantaged category has been dissected in its design, content, function, and perception. The first part of the article explores different state-private welfare function models and locates the 25 per cent reservation clause under the gamut of one of its classifications. The second part of the article evaluates the Formalist and Realist arguments, and while mapping the role played by objective purpose of the education statute, it argues for the suitability of Holmesian approach to interpreting the 25 per cent reservation clause. In the backdrop of the debate between formal interpretation and Holmesian interpretation, the third part of the article sets out the approaches adopted by different High Courts in interpreting 25 per cent reservation clause and argues for adopting a coherent approach across different courts in India. The final part of the article concludes.","PeriodicalId":43737,"journal":{"name":"Statute Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/slr/hmaa013","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statute Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/slr/hmaa013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as RTE Act) enacted by the Indian Parliament in 2009 has been a kernel of constitutional controversies. There are spate of controversies emerging from polemical provisions under the RTE Act. In this article, the rabid principle slating out free education for children for economically weaker section and disadvantaged category has been dissected in its design, content, function, and perception. The first part of the article explores different state-private welfare function models and locates the 25 per cent reservation clause under the gamut of one of its classifications. The second part of the article evaluates the Formalist and Realist arguments, and while mapping the role played by objective purpose of the education statute, it argues for the suitability of Holmesian approach to interpreting the 25 per cent reservation clause. In the backdrop of the debate between formal interpretation and Holmesian interpretation, the third part of the article sets out the approaches adopted by different High Courts in interpreting 25 per cent reservation clause and argues for adopting a coherent approach across different courts in India. The final part of the article concludes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2009年《儿童免费义务教育权利法》解读原则
印度议会于2009年颁布的《2009年儿童免费义务教育法》(以下简称《RTE法》)一直是宪法争议的核心。RTE法案下的争议性条款引发了一系列争议。本文从设计、内容、功能和观念等方面剖析了为经济较弱和弱势群体的儿童提供免费教育的狂热原则。文章的第一部分探讨了不同的公私福利函数模型,并将25%保留条款置于其中一种分类的范围之下。文章的第二部分评价了形式主义和现实主义的论点,在描绘教育法规的客观目的所起作用的同时,论证了霍尔姆斯方法对25%保留条款的解释的适用性。在正式解释和霍尔姆斯解释之间辩论的背景下,文章的第三部分列出了不同高等法院在解释25%保留条款时采用的方法,并主张在印度不同法院采用一致的方法。文章的最后一部分结束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The principal objectives of the Review are to provide a vehicle for the consideration of the legislative process, the use of legislation as an instrument of public policy and of the drafting and interpretation of legislation. The Review, which was first established in 1980, is the only journal of its kind within the Commonwealth. It is of particular value to lawyers in both private practice and in public service, and to academics, both lawyers and political scientists, who write and teach within the field of legislation.
期刊最新文献
Revisiting Criminal Law Bills: An In-Depth Critical Analysis of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Bill Four Years of Anti-COVID-19 Regulations in Greece: Overview of the Legislative and Regulatory Process and of an Exemplary Administrative Codification Two Uses of Purpose in Statutory Interpretation Climate Volatility, Foundational Freedoms, and the Environment Act 2021: The Transformative Potential of the Principle of Legality Protection of Athletes’ Rights in International Sports Organizations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1