State Legislative Brief

RAJASTHAN

 The Rajasthan Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Bill, 2025  

 Key Features

• Every coaching centre must register.  Each branch of a coaching centre will be registered separately.
• Coaching centres must ensure specified infrastructure, provide for a counselling system, and adhere to teaching-related norms.
• The Bill establishes a two-tier regulatory structure consisting of a committee at the district level and a state-level Authority.

Key Issues and Analysis

• The Bill seeks to address issues with coaching centres, which may be symptomatic of underlying issues with the larger education system.
• The Bill places a wide range of obligations on coaching centres.  The question is whether there is need for regulation.  This may lead to an increase in costs, which will ultimately be borne by students.
• The Bill does not regulate online coaching centres, which provide similar services.

 The Rajasthan Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly on March 19, 2025.  It was referred to a Select Committee on March 24, 2025.  This brief is based on the revised version of the Bill, as recommended by the Committee.         

PART A: HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BILL

Education is a subject under the Concurrent list of the Constitution, which implies that both Parliament and State Assemblies may make laws on coaching centres.  States such as Bihar, Haryana, Goa, Manipur, and Uttar Pradesh have enacted laws to regulate coaching centres.[1]^{,[2],[3],[4],[5]}  In 2024, the Union Ministry of Education issued guidelines for regulation of coaching centres.[6]  These guidelines suggest registration of coaching centres, adequate infrastructure, and mental health support to students.  The Rajasthan Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly in March 2025.[7]  It seeks to regulate coaching centres and enforce minimum standards for infrastructure and teaching.  The Bill was referred to a Select Committee (Chair: Dr. Prem Chand Bairwa) for scrutiny.  The Committee report was presented on September 1, 2025.

As per the Comprehensive Modular Survey - Education (2025), around 75% of students at the secondary and higher secondary levels in India had enrolled for private coaching.[8]  Private coaching at the secondary and higher-secondary level was common in both urban (85%) and rural (70%) areas.8  The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education (2025) has noted the prevalence of fraud, suicides, drug abuse, and mental health struggles in such centres.[9]

• Mandatory registration:  The Bill requires every coaching centre in the state to register.  Existing coaching centres must register within three months from the commencement of the Act.  If a coaching centre has multiple branches, each branch will be treated as a separate coaching centre and must be registered separately.  The Bill defines a coaching centre as a centre which provides coaching to more than 100 students for any study programme, competitive exam, or academic support.  Coaching is defined as tuition, instructions, or guidance in any branch of learning, but will not include counselling, sports, dance, theatre, and other creative activities.  The registration will be valid for three years.

• Infrastructure requirements:  Every coaching centre must provide specified infrastructure which includes: (i) minimum one square meter area for each student in a batch, (ii) fully electrified and well-ventilated building, (iii) safe and potable drinking water, (iv) separate toilets for male and female, (v) CCTV cameras, and (vi) first aid kit and medical assistance/treatment facility.  The buildings of coaching centres must adhere to fire safety and building safety codes, and obtain a fire and building safety certificate. 

• Counselling and mental health support:  Coaching centres must establish a mechanism for immediate intervention and assistance to students in distress.  They must provide for a counselling system involving career counsellors and experienced psychologists.  They must conduct regular workshops and awareness programmes for parents, students, and teachers on mental health and prevention of stress.  The Bill states that a coaching centre will not be registered unless it has a counselling system as per the provisions of the Bill.

• Regulation of fees:  Fees charged by a coaching centre must be fair and reasonable.  It must make information about fees and refunds publicly available.  It must provide an option to pay fees in at least four instalments.  Fees cannot be increased for an ongoing course.  Fee refund for the course, hostel, and mess must be on pro-rata basis. 

• Teaching norms:  Tutors in coaching centres must be at least graduates.  A coaching centre must: (i) provide support classes to students who require additional support in academics, (ii) ensure weekly off for students and tutors, (iii) not conduct coaching classes for more than five hours a day, (iv) not conduct exams on the day after  weekly off, and (v) organise co-curricular activities regularly.  The Bill specifies a code of conduct for coaching centres.  Key features of the code include: (i) the number of students enrolled in the batch must be fixed and published on the website, (ii) every batch must have an adequate student-teacher ratio, (iii) students must be made aware of the curriculum, education environment, and alternative career options, (iv) students must not be segregated based on their performance, and (v) coaching centres must keep the assessment results confidential.

• Restrictions on government school teachers:  The Bill prohibits teachers of regular cadre strength in any government institution from teaching in coaching centres.

• District Committees:  The state government will constitute a District Committee in each district for monitoring coaching centres.  The District Magistrate (DM) will be the chairperson of the Committee.  Other members include: (i) Superintendent of Police, (ii) Chief Medical and Health Officer, (iii) District Education Officer, and (iv) two representatives each for coaching centres and parents.  Functions of the Committee include registering coaching centres, and enquiring into complaints made by students or parents.

• State Authority:  The state government will constitute the Rajasthan Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Authority to monitor performance of district committees.  The Authority will also hear appeals against the orders of district committees.  The Secretary of the Higher Education Department will be the chairperson of the Authority.  Other members include: (i) secretaries of the departments of school education, technical education, and medical education, (ii) Director General of Police, and (iii) two representatives each for coaching centres and parents.

• Prohibition on misleading advertisements:  A coaching centre must not publish misleading advertisements.

• Penalties:  For first violation of any conditions under the Bill, a coaching centre will be liable to pay a penalty of Rs 50,000.  Second violation will be punishable with a penalty of two lakh rupees.  Any subsequent violation will result in cancellation of registration.

PART B: KEY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

Students may avail coaching or additional tutoring to supplement their regular studying in various ways.  Coaching may be availed one-on-one, in small groups, in a classroom setup in coaching centres, or online in any of these formats.[10]  The Statement of Objects and Reasons to the Bill states that the number of coaching centres have been increasing and they are largely unregulated.  Such centres foster a highly competitive environment and make false claims leading to high stress levels in students.  The Bill proposes to regulate coaching centres to address these issues.  However, the rise of coaching centres and stress of competitive exams may be symptomatic of underlying issues with the education sector and uncertainties with the job market.  We discuss some of these issues below.

Poor quality of education in schools

A study by the Asian Development Bank (2012) had observed an increase in private coaching in India, particularly at the primary and secondary school levels.[11]  One of the reasons behind this trend is the perception of inadequacies in regular schooling such as: (i) incomplete coverage of syllabus, (ii) lack of individual attention to students, and (iii) difficulty in understanding school’s teaching methodology.11  In such cases, tutoring complements schooling.11  The Economic Survey (2016-17) observed that poor learning outcomes can be attributed to teacher absenteeism and shortage of professionally qualified teachers.[12]  Consequently, students often invest in coaching to improve subject knowledge and receive the individual attention that is lacking in regular classrooms.

Encouragement for tutoring by teachers in regular class

Private tutoring has also become common due to teachers supplementing their incomes.  UNESCO’s State of the Education Report for India (2021) highlighted that around 30% of teachers supplemented their salary with private tutoring.[13]  Teachers may devote more attention in their private tuitions than the regular class.[14]  Another report by UNESCO observed that in many cases, teachers covered less material in school to increase demand for private tutoring.[15]  Teachers may promote private coaching by informing students in class, informing parents during parent-teacher meetings, or sometimes by using school premises for the same.10

Competitive examinations for education

A key factor driving demand for private coaching is that parents often associate quality education with improved employment prospects and higher standards of living.11  They may enrol their students into coaching centres for this purpose.11  The Union Ministry of Education (2024) has observed that the current nature of secondary school examinations and competitive exams has led to a rise in coaching culture.[16]  Competition occurs at two levels.  First, during board exams which decide which students can continue and which may drop out.11  Families seeking to avoid their child’s exclusion begin private tutoring to secure a competitive edge.  Second, at the level of entrance tests for colleges, where coaching is viewed as an essential to improve chances of admission.11

Competition for government jobs

An ILO report (2024) observed that the youth aspire for white-collar jobs for higher income and job stability.[17]  Between 2014-15 and 2021-22, around 22 crore candidates applied for permanent central government jobs for 7.2 lakh posts.[18]  The ILO reported a similar trend in applications in group C and group D government jobs.17  For instance, in Uttar Pradesh, 93,000 candidates (includes postgraduates and PhD holders) applied for 62 posts of peon in the Police department.  In Madhya Pradesh, 15 vacancies for peons and drivers drew 11,000 applications.17  Families invest in coaching to improve chances of selection.

The Bill seeks to regulate coaching centres.  Coaching is a service offered by the private sector.14  Parents and students willingly invest in it to advance their social and economic positioning.11  The Bill goes beyond safety standards and consumer protection to prescribe regulations on class timings, weekly offs, restrictions on when evaluation may be conducted, and infrastructure.  The question is whether there is a need for regulation. 

For example, the Bill requires every coaching centre to establish a mechanism to provide targeted and continued assistance to students in distress.  A counselling system must be developed, with information about available psychologists and counsellors.  Regular workshops and awareness weeks on mental health must be organised by the coaching centres.  The Bill also states that no coaching centre without a counselling system will be registered.  Such compliance can lead to increase in costs, which will ultimately be borne by students.

The Bill defines a coaching centre as a centre which provides coaching to more than 100 students for any competitive exam, or academic support.  Each branch of a coaching centre will be treated as a separate coaching centre, and must be registered separately.  It further provides that no coaching centre will be registered if it has less than a minimum one square meter area per student.  It also specifies several norms for buildings of coaching centres.  These provisions indicate that the Bill is primarily targeted towards regulating coaching centres which have a physical presence. 

However, many coaching centres as well as private tutors are shifting towards providing coaching online.[19]  Education technology firms are providing online marketplaces for connecting students and teachers.19  Coaching may operate entirely in online space, and some may use a hybrid model of physical centres and online classes.  The Bill does not have provisions regarding online coaching.  It therefore differentiates between classroom coaching and online coaching centres.  One could argue that these services are similar in nature, other than features related to physical infrastructure, and should be treated similarly.

The Bill prohibits teachers serving in the regular cadre strength of government institutions from teaching in private coaching centres.  However, this restriction is not applicable for contractual teachers serving in government institutions.  The rationale for excluding contractual teachers is unclear.  Both regular and contractual teachers perform the same functions and may have similar incentives to undertake private coaching.

The Bill states that decisions of the state government or the Authority or any other person under the Bill cannot be called in question in any civil court.  The Authority is an executive body chaired by the Secretary of the Higher Education Department.  The decisions may include refusal or cancellation of registration, or levy of penalty.  Hence, the Bill bars judicial recourse to a person aggrieved by such decisions.   The only option available to them will be filing a writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Bogus and misleading advertisements

The Bill empowers a district committee to enquire into publication of “bogus advertisements”.  It also prohibits a coaching centre from publishing or causing to publish “misleading advertisements”.  While the Bill defines advertisement, the terms “bogus” and “misleading” have not been defined.  This may lead to varying interpretations and disputes.  The approach is in contrast with the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, (CPA, 2019) passed by Parliament.[20]  The CPA, 2019 also prohibits misleading advertisements.  It defines a misleading advertisement as an advertisement which: (i) falsely describes product or service, (ii) gives a false guarantee, (iii) deliberately conceals important information, or (iv) conveys information that would constitute an unfair trade practice.  The CPA, 2019 does not use the term “bogus advertisement”.

Fair and reasonable fees

The Bill states that the fees charged by coaching centres must be “fair and reasonable”.  However, it does not provide further guidance or any criteria to assess what qualifies as fair and reasonable.  While the absence of detailed criteria may allow for flexibility to factor differences across coaching centres, it may also lead to varying interpretations and disputes.  In states such as Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Delhi, laws have been passed to regulate fees charged by schools.[21]  These laws specify factors to be taken into account while determining fees.  These include location, infrastructure, educational standards, quality of faculty, and recurring expenditure.

The table below provides a comparison of laws regulating coaching centres in various states.