Summary of public responses

A consolidated view of what verified respondents have said about the draft Maharashtra Private Coaching Centers (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2026. Every figure comes straight from the records below and updates as responses arrive.

3
verified respondents
5
votes cast
0
written responses
22
points under discussion

Who is responding

By the role each respondent declared

Coaching centre owner / director
2
Teacher / faculty
1

Where the discussion is concentrated

Written responses per point

No responses yet.

Agreement on each provision

Agreement to the right, disagreement to the left. Ordered from most to least agreed.

Mandatory registration, renewable every 3 years, separately for each branch100% agreen=2
Ban on misleading advertisements and guarantees of rank or marks100% agreen=1
No enrolment of students below 13 years of age50% agreen=2

The most divided provisions

The points where opinion splits closest to evenly — the provisions that most need further discussion.

  1. 1
    No enrolment of students below 13 years of age
    50% agree · 2 votes · 0 responses
  2. 2
  3. 3

Point by point

Votes, the mix of positions, and the responses moderators marked as representative.

SupportNeeds changesNeed clarityOppose

📝 Registration & Compliance

💰 Fees & Financial

📚 Academics & Batches

👨‍🏫 Teachers & Staff

🏢 Infrastructure & Safety

🧠 Student Welfare

Points the draft does not cover, raised by respondents

  • Reclassify coaching under a lower GST slab

    Coaching centres are currently taxed as service providers at 18% GST. If the sector is now to be formally registered and regulated as an education provider, the tax treatment should follow: a concessional slab (for example 5%) so the benefit reaches parents and so centres can fund the infrastructure this Bill mandates.