Nice explanation and you have covered all the provisions of free and compulsory education in such a short time and easy way.. 👍
@kajalagarwal57962 жыл бұрын
👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
@dr.selvarajthangaswamy79274 ай бұрын
Mam, but they could have used the same 0-14 as in old article 45 for new article 21A also. Why they thought of bringing 6-14???
@pictolearning29194 ай бұрын
Hi Selvaraj...Thank you for asking this question... See, there are several reasons for separating Article 21A and Article 45. 1) Earlier Education of children was not a fundamental right. It was only defined in article 45, which was under DPSP, and you know, DPSP is non enforceable. So, by 86th CAA, it was decided to make "education of children" a fundamental right. and that's why Article 21A was introduced in the Constitution. 2) Both groups of children have different needs. Children aged 0 to 6 need care and basic learning. That's why it was not necessary to make it a fundamental right. It was enough to keep it under DPSP. While children aged 6 to 14 need proper school education, which is very important for children's future, and for the development of the entire country. and that's why, education of children of especially 6 to 14 years was made a fundamental right, using article 21A. 3) And if you have read, Article 21A talks about free and compulsory education of children between 6 to 14 years. 0 to 6 years of children do not need compulsory education. 4) Separating two articles helps the government take care of both the groups in the right way. We can also say, government has done this for better implementation.
@pictolearning29194 ай бұрын
I hope, there is no doubt in this question.🙂
@dr.selvarajthangaswamy79273 ай бұрын
Yes mam. Thankyou so much. I'm eternally grateful🙏🙏🙏🙏