RTE 2009 towards privatization of education

The worst eruption of basic education was not as bad as it was when RTE Act was introduced in 2009. Right now, the order came in light of the rules of RTE, as per the order of which 150 students, And there is no need for a Principal on less than 100 students in upper primary. Senior teachers in these schools will work as in-charge. Now imagine what will be the hallmarks of those schools, the teacher who will be charged for 149 children, how much weight will be on it, from the midday meal of the school to the school repairs, from filling the day form to the meeting at the BRC He will have to do all the work till But he will remain 'assistant teacher' only. Because neither the assistant will get additional beton or allowance if he is in charge nor in the future, because in the schools which are currently working as assistant in charge, it has been said that till there is no headmaster Until you remained in the temporary charge. Now, when more than 150 children and many schools are away from 150, then they will have to work as permanent in charge. His salary will be as much as the rest of the helpers, but he will also have to do the work of the headmaster with a helper, if he is seen, it will be a mental and physical exploitation in a way. The second effect of this order will be on the vacancies of Principals. Because the order of the Principal will end in a large number and the ones who are, they will be shifted to the schools where the child is more than 150, and one thing is that such a school is very less. Therefore promotion will be stopped, now Junior TET is required to become junior assistant then if the junior TET and Clear No Junior also forget to be promoted. I do not know why the Right to Education Act, these rules which have been implemented since 2009, are now being implemented all over again? How suddenly did the headmaster begin to feel burdened? Do not they know the importance of the headmaster in schools? Has anyone seen a private school where there is no headmaster? A Principal not only runs the school but also manages it, maintains discipline. The Principal does not only teach the students but also disciplines the teachers. The Principal's role is in maintaining the quality of education. Every institution requires a head (head), even in our homes, where there are only 4-6 members, there is also a leader, here is a question of 149 members, under section 21 of the Constitution According to the Right to Education Act, there is the right to quality education. That seems to be far-fetched without the headmistress. One question arises that there is no head on 149 and suddenly a student will come and need a head? These rules do not seem strange? I think such rules need to be amended. This is why I request all our organizations, take a look at this issue, and oppose this order, because this order is not only against those Assistant teachers who will be deprived of the dream of becoming the Principal, but against the children There are also schools which come in the hope of quality education. Surely, the Government has kept a desire to privatize education on the basis of rule governance.