Crime Today News
The State of Tamil Nadu has moved the Supreme Court against the Union of India for withholding funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme (SSS) over the non-implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 and PM SHRI.
Filed under Article 131 of the Constitution, the suit sought a direction to the Centre to pay over Rs 2291 crore, said to be due under the SSS, along with future interest.
It further sought directions to declare the Union government’s action in linking the entitlement to receive funds under the SSS for the implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 and the PM Shri Schools within the state of Tamil Nadu as ‘illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and unreasonable’.
Filed by Advocate Sabarish Subramanian, the suit pointed out that for the FY 2024-25, the Project Approval Board, in its meeting held on February 16, 2024, after being satisfied with the due compliance of all the components by it under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme, allocated a total of Rs 3585.99 crore as the total outlay for expenditure.
As under the 60:40 sharing basis, the Central share amounted to Rs 2151.6 crore. However, the Central government failed to disburse the funds due and payable to the Plaintiff State from April 1, 2024.
As per the plaint, the Central government linked the release of SSS funds with the implementation of ‘National Education Policy’ and ‘NEP exemplary PM SHRI Schools’ scheme, and refused to disburse any instalment.
The MoU pertaining to the PM SHRI Schools Scheme mandated the implementation of the NEP-2020 in the state.
The state government said it was opposed to the implementation of the NEP since it envisaged a three-language formula.
As per the PM Shri scheme, certain schools in a state were selected to showcase the implementation of the NEP. The schools would be presented as exemplary schools for NEP. Over 14,500 PM SHRI Schools were sought to be established nationwide. About 1100 schools were identified in Tamil Nadu.
Through letters dated February 23, 2024 and March 7, 2024, the Centre pressed the state government to implement NEP 2020 and sign the MOU for PM SHRI Schools scheme. The Tamil Nadu Education Department responded through a letter dated July 6, 2024, requesting modifications to the MoU clauses concerning the implementation of all provisions of NEP-2020 across the entire state.
Settled by Senior Advocate P Wilson, the suit termed as unjustified and arbitrary, the action of the Defendant in linking the SSS with the PM SHRI Schools Scheme, despite the fact that these two Centrally-sponsored schemes had no interrelationship, convergence or interconnection, and operated in entirely different domains. The attempt to link these schemes under the pretext of implementing the NEP-2020 was legally questionable, fundamentally unacceptable, and violative of the State’s autonomy, the federal structure of the Constitution, and the statutes enacted by the State, it added.
Noting that the financial support provided by the Union as per the SSS was a statutory mandate under the Right to Education Act, 2009, the state said it could not be withheld on the ground of other schemes, which have no legislative backing.
“The Plaintiff State is well within its rights to refuse the implementation of the NEP-2020 or the PM SHRI Schools Scheme, as these are policies devoid of any statutory authority. The NEP-2020 is a policy and vision statement of the Defendant that lacks any executive or legislative force binding the Plaintiff State to its implementation. Furthermore, the NEP- 2020 does not mandate implementation as a condition for receiving financial assistance under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme.”
The suit cited parliamentary responses to questions raised in the Rajya Sabha. It said the State has claimed that for the financial year 2024–25, the Centre has disbursed SS funds to all States except West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
The state said the delay has disrupted salaries, teacher training, student entitlements such as textbooks and uniforms, and infrastructure grants across government schools & hostels.
The petitioner referred to the judgment in Union of India vs Mohit Minerals Private Limited (2022), which highlighted that the States can resist the mandates of the Union by using different forms of political contestation, as it was a facet of federalism.
This article first appeared on India Legal
📰 Crime Today News is proudly sponsored by DRYFRUIT & CO – A Brand by eFabby Global LLC
Design & Developed by Yes Mom Hosting
