AHMEDABAD, Oct 9: Gujarat’s school education system is facing renewed scrutiny after the Union Ministry of Education’s Unified District Information System for Education Plus (UDISE+) report for 2025-26 revealed that 2,335 schools across the state were operating with only one teacher.
The figures have raised concerns about staffing arrangements in primary education and the ability of schools to provide adequate classroom instruction. The issue has also triggered an administrative dispute, with district-level education officers arguing that they lack the authority to transfer or replace teachers to resolve shortages in their jurisdictions.
The Gujarat education department had issued notices in August to District Primary Education Officers (DPEOs) and Administrative Officers (AOs), questioning their failure to address teacher vacancies. The notices described the situation as an administrative lapse and warned that disciplinary action could be considered against officials found responsible.
However, several officers responded that they did not have the powers needed to transfer teachers internally or appoint replacements. They argued that decisions concerning teacher deployment and recruitment rested with higher authorities and the state government.
Director of Primary Education Prakash Trivedi confirmed that the officials had submitted their explanations. He said no action had been taken against them so far.
The dispute has highlighted a central challenge in school administration: identifying staffing shortages through official data is only one part of the process, while correcting them requires clear responsibility, recruitment decisions and coordination between different levels of government.
UDISE+ report highlights staffing gaps
The UDISE+ report is the Union Education Ministry’s official digital platform for collecting and analysing information from recognised schools, covering education from the pre-primary level to higher secondary classes.
Its 2025-26 findings identified 2,335 schools in Gujarat that had only one teacher. The report also showed that approximately 80,053 children were enrolled in these institutions.
The figures indicate that the issue affects a substantial number of students and is not limited to a small group of isolated schools. When a school relies on a single teacher, that educator may have to manage multiple classes, administrative responsibilities and different learning requirements during the same school day.
The exact impact can vary according to enrolment, the number of grades being taught and the availability of additional support. Nevertheless, the figures have drawn attention to the need for staffing arrangements that allow schools to meet students’ educational needs.
The same report showed that Gujarat had 53,425 government and private schools, with an average of seven teachers per school and average enrolment of 217 students. These state-level averages provide a broader picture of the school system, but they can also conceal differences between individual institutions and locations.
A school with several teachers may have the staff needed to distribute subjects and responsibilities more effectively, while a single-teacher institution faces different operational pressures. The reported figures therefore underline the importance of examining school-level conditions rather than relying only on statewide averages.
Education department issues notices
After the report highlighted the staffing situation, the Director of Primary Education issued notices to district-level officers across Gujarat. The department cited provisions of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, and the Gujarat Civil Services rules while seeking explanations for the reported gaps.
The notices alleged that the failure to maintain the prescribed pupil-teacher ratio amounted to serious administrative negligence. They also directed officials to arrange teachers and submit countersigned certificates confirming that the required staffing levels had been maintained.
The department warned that disciplinary measures, including possible action affecting increments, could be considered in cases where responsibility for the shortcomings was established.
The notices placed responsibility on district officers to explain why staffing gaps had remained unresolved. The officials, however, responded that they could not independently transfer or replace teachers because they did not possess the necessary administrative powers.
According to an officer quoted in the report, the relevant decisions had to be taken by the state government rather than district officials who lacked the authority to make such changes.
The disagreement raises questions about how accountability should operate when an administrative officer is expected to address a problem but does not control the decisions or resources required to resolve it.
While district officers are responsible for monitoring the functioning of schools within their areas, their ability to correct staffing shortages depends on the powers assigned to them and the availability of teachers for deployment.
Right to Education provisions
The education department referred to Section 25(1) of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, and its accompanying schedule, which prescribe pupil-teacher ratio requirements for elementary schools.
The department argued that maintaining the required ratio is a legal obligation and that schools cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely without adequate teaching staff.
The pupil-teacher ratio is an important measure of the relationship between the number of students and teachers. Appropriate staffing helps schools organise classes, provide instruction and respond to children’s learning needs.
However, meeting a ratio requirement involves more than calculating the total number of teachers across a district or state. Staff must be available at the individual schools where they are needed, and their deployment must reflect enrolment and the requirements of different classes.
The Gujarat case demonstrates the difference between broad staffing statistics and the distribution of teachers on the ground. Even if a state has a substantial teaching workforce overall, shortages can persist in particular schools when staff are unevenly distributed or recruitment does not keep pace with requirements.
The notices issued by the department sought immediate arrangements to address the gaps, along with certification that the prescribed staffing standards had been met.
State says recruitment is underway
The state education authorities have indicated that recruitment of permanent teachers is being undertaken to address staffing gaps in schools with no teachers or only one teacher.
Trivedi said the government had decided to recruit permanent teachers for zero-teacher and single-teacher schools through the ongoing recruitment process.
He also explained that arrangements had been made in schools with no teachers by assigning work to temporary teachers. Such arrangements did not appear in the UDISE+ data because the appointments and salaries were not recorded in the same way as regular teacher postings.
This distinction is important when interpreting the figures. A school may have temporary teaching support even if the official dataset does not record a regular teacher against its sanctioned staffing position. At the same time, temporary arrangements do not remove the need to establish a stable and adequate teaching workforce.
The department’s recruitment plans will therefore be important in determining how quickly the reported shortages can be addressed. The effectiveness of the response will depend on filling vacancies and ensuring that teachers are posted to schools where staffing needs are greatest.
Recruitment alone may not resolve every local problem if deployment decisions, transfers and administrative coordination remain difficult. Authorities will also need to monitor whether newly appointed teachers reach the institutions identified in the report.
Zero-enrolment schools also under review
The UDISE+ findings identified another concern: 74 teachers were posted in schools where no children were enrolled.
The Director of Primary Education said the department had instructed district officers to begin the process of closing schools with zero enrolment. The process was underway, according to the report.
Such cases present a different administrative challenge from schools with too few teachers. While single-teacher institutions require attention to staffing, schools with no enrolled students raise questions about the use of public resources, school access and the reasons for the absence of enrolment.
Any decision concerning a school’s future needs to account for the circumstances of the local community and the availability of alternative educational facilities. Authorities must also consider whether students could face additional travel or access difficulties if a school is closed.
The reported figures show that teacher deployment and school management require attention at both ends of the system: ensuring adequate staff where children attend school and reviewing arrangements where no students are enrolled.
Implications for students and school management
The shortage of teachers in single-teacher schools can place pressure on classroom organisation. Where one educator is responsible for children in multiple grades, dividing time between different lessons and learning levels can be difficult.
Teachers may have to manage classroom instruction while also completing attendance records, administrative work and other school responsibilities. The extent of these challenges depends on the size of the school, the range of classes and the support available.
For students, consistent access to teachers is an important part of receiving regular instruction. Staffing gaps can make it harder for schools to organise lessons according to grade level and provide individual attention where required.
The reported enrolment of 80,053 children in single-teacher schools makes the issue significant for education planning. Ensuring that these institutions have sufficient teachers will require both recruitment and effective deployment.
The dispute between the education department and district officers also points to the importance of clearly defined administrative powers. If officials are expected to meet staffing standards, they need appropriate authority, reliable information and a practical mechanism for obtaining additional staff.
Way forward
The immediate priority for Gujarat will be to translate the recruitment process into improved staffing at the affected schools. Authorities will need to track vacancies, monitor teacher placements and verify whether schools meet the applicable pupil-teacher requirements.
A transparent system for reviewing school-level data could help identify institutions where staffing shortages persist. Regular coordination between state authorities and district offices would also help ensure that responsibility for recruitment, transfers and deployment is clearly understood.
The department’s decision to seek explanations from officers has brought the issue into focus, but the long-term outcome will depend on whether the administrative process leads to measurable improvements in classrooms.
The UDISE+ findings provide a basis for assessing where intervention is required. The challenge now is to ensure that staffing decisions respond to the needs of individual schools and that children receive the teaching support required for their education.
The situation in Gujarat highlights the importance of linking education data, administrative accountability and recruitment planning. Addressing these elements together will be essential to improving staffing conditions and ensuring that school-level requirements are met.