‘Neighbourhood School’ Under RTE Act Depends On Local Geography And Population Patterns, Not Fixed Distance Norms: Kerala High Court Dismisses Lakshadweep School Shifting Challenge
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Kerala Single Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh dismissed writ petitions filed by minor elementary students from Agatti and Andrott Islands in the Union Territory of Lakshadweep, challenging education department decisions to shift and merge Junior Basic Schools. The Court held that the idea of a “neighbourhood school” under the RTE framework cannot be applied through a fixed, distance-only formula and must be assessed with reference to local geography and population patterns. On the facts, it found no illegality in relocating the Agatti classes to the North school building and shifting the Andrott classes to another nearby school, concluding that the arrangements did not breach the neighbourhood-school requirement.
The writ petitions were filed by minor students represented by their parents challenging administrative orders issued by the Director of Education, Lakshadweep Administration, proposing shifting of classes from Junior Basic Schools in Agatti and Andrott Islands to nearby schools.
In one petition, students of Junior Basic School (South), Agatti sought to quash an order directing that classes functioning in PM SHRI JB School (South) be shifted to the Government JB School (North) building. In the connected petition, students of Government Junior Basic School (GJBS), Machery, Andrott challenged the proposal to shift classes to Government SB School, Edachery.
The petitioners contended that the proposed shifting violated Section 6 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and Rule 6(1)(a) of the 2010 Rules, as children would allegedly be deprived of access to a school within one kilometre of their neighbourhood. The respondents filed counter affidavits stating that the buildings of certain schools were dilapidated, that sufficient infrastructure was available in the receiving schools, and that multiple primary schools were functioning within short distances on the islands.
The Court observed that “The mandate of Section 6 is that there should be a School within such area or limits of ‘neighbourhood’ as may be prescribed by the Government.”
It recorded that “The term “neighbourhood” therefore cannot be defined with clinical precision or mathematical exactitude, for the purpose of the RTE Act. The Union Legislature rightly left it to be decided by appropriate State Governments / Union Territories. The term “neighbourhood” only refers to the locality.”
It further stated, “The Union Legislature rightly left it to be decided by appropriate State Governments / Union Territories.” and added that “The term ‘neighbourhood’ only refers to the locality.”
With respect to the applicability of Rules, the Court observed that “It is the Central Rules, 2010 that is applicable to the Union Territory of Lakshadweep.” and that “Though the Rules mandate that a School for Classes I to V shall be established within a walking distance of one kilometre of the neighbourhood, the term ‘neighbourhood’ is not defined in the Rules.”
Referring to the geographical aspects of the islands, the Court recorded that “In the case of Andrott Island, the total length of the Island is only 4.66 Km. and the maximum width is 1.43 Km.” and that “Within the said Island having 4.66 Km. length, six Primary Schools are functioning.”
Regarding Agatti Island, it observed that “The total length of Agatti Island is 7 Km. only.” and noted that even after shifting, multiple schools would continue to function.
The Court stated, “I do not find any illegality in shifting of the Schools or violation of Section 6 or the Rules made thereunder. The writ petitions are therefore without any merit and are hence dismissed.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Sri. Rilgin V. George; Shri. K.T. Raveendran; Smt. Akshara K.P.; Sri. K.M. Firoz; Shri. A.B.M. Hamdullah Sayeed; Shri. Sayyid Mohammed Nilamuddin M.; Shri. Aashique Akthar Hajjigothi
For the Respondents: Sri. K.S. Prenjith Kumar, CGC
Case Title: Ummu Sulaim (Minor) & Ors. v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2026: KER:11065
Case Number: WP(C) Nos. 18868 & 20161 of 2025
Bench: Justice N. Nagaresh
