Maharashtra’s proposed law to regulate private coaching classes has come under opposition from the Professional Teachers Association of Maharashtra (PTAM), which has asked the state government to revise provisions relating to registration limits, young students and compliance requirements.
The association raised its objections at a press conference in Pune on September 9, saying the proposed framework could place an excessive regulatory burden on coaching institutions and create scope for arbitrary administrative action. PTAM said the government should consult representatives of the coaching sector before finalising the legislation.
According to the report, the Bombay High Court has directed the state government to hear PTAM’s submissions before enacting the proposed law. The court also directed the government to explain its reasons if the association’s views were not accepted. PTAM alleged that despite pursuing consultations, the state government had not complied with the direction.
One of the association’s principal objections concerns the proposed registration threshold. PTAM has sought an increase in the limit of 25 students to more than 100 students for each branch. It argued that a lower threshold could make it difficult for established institutions to operate within the proposed framework and could bring smaller teaching activities under complex registration procedures.
The association has also opposed a blanket prohibition on coaching for children below the age of 13. PTAM said parents should retain the right to decide whether their children attend coaching classes. It argued that age-specific remedial education, foundational learning, advanced instruction, Olympiad preparation and scholarship-examination coaching should not be prohibited without distinction.
PTAM said private coaching institutions supplement the formal education system by providing personalised academic guidance, remedial and advanced instruction, examination preparation and specialised teaching. The association also described the sector as a source of employment in rural, semi-urban and urban areas, saying coaching centres support students beyond the major cities as well.
At the same time, the association said it supported appropriate, balanced and transparent regulation. Its objections, it said, were directed at provisions that could impose disproportionate compliance costs or permit arbitrary action rather than at regulation itself. PTAM president Dr Prashant Kulkarni said the organisation was preparing a model law for the sector.
The association has further sought separate classifications based on the geographical area and type of coaching institution. It said refund rules should account for expenditure already incurred by institutions on educational material, digital platforms, administration, taxes, teacher-related financial commitments and physical infrastructure.
The government’s proposed law, as described in the report, would therefore affect more than the registration of coaching centres. Its final provisions could determine how small home-based tutors, neighbourhood classes and larger branches are treated, as well as how parental choice, student protection and institutional compliance are balanced. The next step is the state government’s response to the association’s submissions and the reported High Court direction.
