In a move that could prove to be a watershed moment for West Bengal’s school education system, Bikash Bhaban, the administrative headquarters of the state’s School Education Department, has initiated a statewide exercise to investigate allegations of unauthorised private tuition by government and government-aided school teachers following the intervention of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!The move comes after the NHRC reportedly sought a response from the state government to complaints alleging that some teachers employed in government and government-aided institutions were conducting private tuition classes in violation of statutory provisions, departmental notifications, and judicial directives.
According to informed sources within the education administration, the June 4 communication issued by the Directorate of School Education, West Bengal, has effectively put district authorities on notice, directing them to investigate complaints received at the local level and initiate action wherever violations are established.
The directive has also been forwarded to the NHRC and senior officials in the Higher Education Department, underscoring the seriousness with which the matter is now being viewed.
AN OLD RULE, A NEW ENFORCEMENT PUSH
The prohibition on private tuition by government and government-aided school teachers is not a newly introduced policy. Rather, the latest directive serves as a reminder of legal provisions that have existed for years, but whose enforcement has periodically generated debate.
At the heart of the issue is Section 28 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, which bars teachers employed in schools covered by the Act from engaging in private teaching.
The state government has also issued multiple notifications over the years reiterating the restriction. Education department communications issued in 2011 and again in 2018 emphasised that teachers drawing salaries from the public exchequer cannot undertake private tuition for personal financial gain.
However, departmental rules distinguish between private tuition and institutional academic support. Teachers may participate in remedial coaching, supplementary classes, or other academic interventions organised by their schools for students requiring additional assistance.
The latest communication from Bikash Bhaban reiterates this distinction while warning that any violation of the law will invite appropriate disciplinary and legal consequences.
THE NHRC TRIGGER
Sources familiar with the matter indicate that the renewed administrative activity was prompted by complaints that eventually reached the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).
The allegations contained in those complaints are significant. According to representations submitted to the authorities, certain teachers were allegedly conducting private tuition classes while simultaneously teaching at government-funded institutions.
Some complainants further alleged that students were being encouraged or pressured to enrol in such tuition classes. More serious allegations claimed that academic influence, assessment practices, and classroom dynamics were being used to create pressure on students and guardians.
These allegations remain allegations and would require verification through due process and departmental inquiry. Nevertheless, their appearance before a constitutional human rights body appears to have accelerated administrative scrutiny. Education observers note that the NHRC’s involvement transformed what might otherwise have remained a routine departmental matter into a broader governance and accountability issue.
“The issue received renewed public attention earlier this year when Hiralal Mondal, President of the West Bengal Private Tutors’ Association, publicly raised concerns regarding alleged violations of rules governing private tuition by government and government-aided school teachers, with Priyank Kanoongo, Chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NHRC), in March 2024”
A DEBATE AS OLD AS THE CHALKBOARD
Private tuition occupies a unique and often controversial place in India’s educational landscape. For decades, coaching and supplementary learning have flourished alongside formal schooling. In many places, parents consider private tuition a necessity rather than an option. Competitive examinations, syllabus pressure, and concerns about learning outcomes have contributed to the sector’s growth.
Yet critics argue that the situation becomes problematic when the same teachers responsible for classroom instruction also operate private coaching arrangements.
The concern is not merely legal. It is fundamentally about a conflict of interest. If classroom teaching is perceived to be insufficient and students feel compelled to seek paid instruction from the very teachers who evaluate them, questions inevitably arise about fairness, equity, and educational ethics.
Supporters of stricter enforcement argue that government teachers are compensated by taxpayers to provide quality education during school hours. They contend that any parallel private arrangement risks undermining public confidence in the school system.
Others caution against sweeping generalisations, emphasising that the overwhelming majority of teachers remain dedicated professionals who serve students despite mounting administrative and academic pressures.
HIRALAL MONDAL’S CRUSADE AGAINST UNAUTHORIZED TUITION
The issue received renewed public attention earlier this year when Hiralal Mondal, President of the West Bengal Private Tutors’ Association, publicly raised concerns regarding alleged violations of rules governing private tuition by government and government-aided school teachers, with Priyank Kanoongo, Chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NHRC), in March 2024.
Mondal revealed that his organisation had received information and complaints suggesting that some state-aided school teachers were continuing to provide paid/private tuition despite statutory restrictions. According to him, the association had undertaken an extensive exercise to document complaints from multiple districts across West Bengal.
The association reportedly compiled information relating to thousands of teachers across several districts, including Kolkata, Howrah, Nadia, North 24 Parganas, South 24 Parganas, Bankura, East and West Medinipur, Malda, Murshidabad, Birbhum, Hooghly, Purba Bardhaman, Paschim Bardhaman, and Dakshin Dinajpur, among others.
Mondal argued that the issue extends beyond professional competition between tutors and school teachers. In his view, it concerns compliance with existing laws and regulations governing public servants employed in educational institutions. He has maintained that if authorities fail to enforce existing provisions, the matter could once again be subject to judicial scrutiny.
Mondal further stated that he had received what he described as credible complaints and information suggesting that certain government and government-aided school teachers were allegedly continuing to conduct private tuition for financial gain despite being salaried employees of the state.
According to him, such activities, if established, would amount to violations of Section 28 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, Rule 4(6) of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (Appointment, Confirmation, Conduct and Discipline of Teachers and Non-Teaching Staff) Rules, 2018, as well as relevant statutory regulations framed under Section 27 of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education Act, 1963.
“Drawing a salary from the public purse while allegedly running a parallel tuition economy is not merely a question of ethics—it is a question of accountability, legality, and the integrity of the classroom itself,” said Mondal.
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK
The controversy rests upon a complex framework of legislation, rules, and administrative orders. Apart from Section 28 of the RTE Act, complainants have also referred to provisions contained in the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education’s conduct and disciplinary regulations.
These rules govern professional conduct, ethical responsibilities, and the duties expected of teachers employed in government and government-aided institutions. Legal experts note that disciplinary action in such cases typically depends on evidence, documentation, and procedural compliance. An allegation alone does not establish wrongdoing.
Authorities must verify complaints, provide opportunities for explanation, examine records, and follow established disciplinary procedures before arriving at any conclusion. That requirement for due process is likely to shape the next phase of developments.
DISTRICT INSPECTORS IN THE SPOTLIGHT
One of the most significant aspects of the June 4 directive is the responsibility placed upon District Inspectors of Schools. These officials now find themselves at the centre of the enforcement effort.
The communication reportedly directs district authorities to examine complaints received locally and determine whether violations have occurred. If evidence supports allegations, authorities have been instructed to initiate action in accordance with applicable laws and service rules.
Education department insiders suggest that the effectiveness of the crackdown will ultimately depend on how rigorously district-level inquiries are conducted. Historically, enforcement has often varied across regions, with some districts adopting stricter approaches than others. The current exercise, therefore, presents a test not only of policy but also of administrative consistency.
POLITICAL REVERBERATIONS
Education policy rarely remains confined to classrooms and administrative offices. In West Bengal, where education is frequently intertwined with public debate and political discourse, the issue has inevitably attracted wider attention.
Critics of the government argue that stronger enforcement should have arrived much earlier. They contend that repeated complaints over the years warranted more proactive monitoring mechanisms. Supporters of the administration counter that the latest directive demonstrates a willingness to act when complaints are formally raised and investigated.
The political argument resembles a familiar classroom scene: one side insists the homework should have been checked months ago, while the other points out that the inspection is finally underway. What remains beyond dispute is that the controversy has reignited discussion about accountability within the education system.
BEYOND COMPLIANCE: THE LARGER EDUCATIONAL QUESTION
Lost amid the legal notices and administrative correspondence is a broader question. Why does the demand for private tuition remain so high?
Parents continue to spend a substantial portion of their household income on supplementary education. Students increasingly juggle school, coaching classes, examinations, and extracurricular commitments. Many education experts believe that enforcement alone cannot resolve the underlying dynamics.
Improving classroom instruction, reducing student-teacher disparities, strengthening remedial support within schools, and enhancing learning outcomes are equally important. If schools can meet academic expectations more effectively, reliance on external coaching may naturally decline. The challenge, therefore, extends beyond identifying rule violations. It involves restoring confidence that the classroom itself can remain the primary centre of learning.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The coming weeks are expected to be crucial. District-level inquiries may begin examining complaints, collecting evidence, and assessing whether violations have occurred. Where allegations are substantiated, disciplinary proceedings could follow.
Where complaints lack evidence, teachers may be cleared. Either way, the process is likely to attract significant public attention. For policymakers, the episode offers an opportunity to reinforce professional conduct standards. For teachers, it serves as a reminder of the legal obligations attached to public employment.
For students and parents, it raises important questions about fairness, access, and educational quality. And for West Bengal’s education system, it marks another chapter in the continuing effort to balance public accountability with the realities of a highly competitive academic environment.
As the spotlight intensifies on allegations of unauthorised private tuition, the lesson for all stakeholders may be impossible to ignore. For years, critics have argued that some classrooms risked becoming mere trailers for the evening’s paid coaching sessions, blurring the line between public duty and private profit.
Now, with Bikash Bhaban stepping in after NHRC intervention, the bell may finally be ringing for greater accountability. Whether this exercise results in meaningful reform or merely another round of bureaucratic homework remains to be seen.
But one thing is certain: In West Bengal’s education sector, the era of marking one’s own report card may be coming to an end, and those accused of turning education into a side business could soon discover that the toughest examination is not conducted in a tuition room, but in the court of law and public scrutiny.
