JEE, NEET, CUET coaching centres: Assam, Rajasthan have framed laws, but will they work?

NEW DELHI: “Coaching institutes have become a crucial part of students' education, helping them prepare for competitive exams like JEE, NEET, and CUET,” said Anitha, who goes by a single name and teaches physics in a private school in Delhi. But concerns persist over high fees, lack of regulation and impact on the mental health of students enrolled in such institutes.

Two states – Assam and Rajasthan – have taken decisive steps to bring coaching institutes preparing lakhs of students for highly-competitive entrance tests for engineering and medicine under closer government supervision. The Assam Coaching Institutes (Control & Regulation) Act, 2025, and Rajasthan’s Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Bill, 2025, attempt to standardise and monitor these coaching centres.

But the proposed regulations have encountered resistance. Keshav Agarwal, president of the Coaching Federation of India and a coaching institute owner, believes that the recent efforts by states are hasty and fail to address the real issues.

Agarwal argues that though coaching centres have become an essential part of the country’s education system, they are being unfairly targeted by governments looking for quick fixes to deeper systemic problems. "The bill is modelled on the coaching culture of Kota and Sikar, but the industry varies widely across India. A regulation must be broadly framed, not based on a few centres," he said.

Agarwal is particularly critical of the Rajasthan Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Bill, 2025, which aims to bring stringent oversight to coaching institutes in the state. "A student might study for five months, then seek a refund claiming they did not understand. How is that rational? The regulation also demands facilities like websites, canteens, and recreation areas, which are impractical for coaching centers. Coaching institutes are not schools," he said.

He cautions that excessive regulations will only push smaller coaching centres into corruption. “Overregulation could drive small institutions towards bribery and corruption rather than genuine improvement," he warned.

Also read Beyond Engineering: Why BTech students are rushing to enrol in short-term online courses

The Assam bill

While Rajasthan’s bill has faced criticism, Assam has also introduced its own set of regulations through the Assam Coaching Institutes (Control & Regulation) Act, 2025. The law, approved by the state cabinet on March 9, seeks to bring order to the coaching industry and safeguard student interests.

Assam Act: Key Provisions

• Mandatory registration: All coaching institutes operating in Assam must register with the state authority, ensuring that only recognised and compliant centres operate.

• Fee transparency: Institutes are required to publicly disclose their fee structures, preventing arbitrary or hidden charges.

• Operational guidelines: The Act sets forth specific standards, including faculty qualifications, infrastructure requirements, and student-teacher ratios.

• Prohibition of unethical practices: The law bans false advertising, misleading claims, and promises of guaranteed selection.

• Student welfare measures: Recognizing the immense pressure of competitive exams, the Act mandates coaching centers to provide counseling services.

Rajasthan Bill and challenges

While Assam's regulations have been widely accepted, Rajasthan’s Coaching Centres (Control and Regulation) Bill, 2025, has faced legislative hurdles. The bill proposes the establishment of the Rajasthan Coaching Centres Control and Regulation Authority, which would oversee the industry.

Key Provisions of Rajasthan Bill:

• Regulatory authority: A new body would monitor coaching centres and enforce compliance.

• Mandatory registration: Like Assam, coaching centres must be officially registered.

• Student mental health focus: Given the rising number of student suicides in Kota, the bill mandates counseling services.

• Fee regulation and refund policies: Standardised fee structures and clear refund policies aim to prevent financial exploitation.

• Penalties for non-compliance: Institutes failing to adhere to the guidelines could face fines and even closure.

The bill has been directed to a select committee for further review after facing opposition. Concerns include the removal of a minimum age requirement and potential bureaucratic inefficiencies.

Also read ‘Research should start early’: VIT Chennai pro VC on AI focus, VITEEE updates and FFCS benefits

Law on coaching centres: ‘Much needed’

Lalan Kumar, co-founder of SPM and Lalans, who has been teaching chemistry for 19 years, supports the Assam government's initiative.

"It was much needed and should have come long ago. Many coaching institutes prioritise business over student care. In some states, including Assam, students are enrolled in JEE and NEET coaching as early as Class 6, while in others, they start in Class 10. This disparity needs a uniform national rule," he emphasised.

Kumar also highlighted the issue of oversized batches, stating that some branded coaching institutes enroll as many as 150 to 160 students in a single class. His own institution, which attracts students from across the Northeast, maintains a limit of 40 students per batch, with plans to increase it to 50 from the next session.

“We have students coming from Meghalaya, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh. These students complete their Class 12 and join our institute. They stay here in hostels and go back after completing seven to eight months of classes with us,” he added.

The Lalans enrol around 300 students every year and expect 350 students to enroll this year.

Parents’ frustration

While regulation is debated, many parents have long expressed frustration with coaching institutes. A parent whose daughter is enrolled in a Guwahati tutorial centre run by one of the biggest chains voiced disappointment over frequent faculty changes and lack of conceptual clarity.

"They are not teaching the way we wanted. The teachers are constantly changing every two months, causing a gap in learning. We have paid Rs 2 lakh, yet the teachers, always on contract, leave within two to three months," said the parent, a professor, speaking anonymously.

Also read Parents paid FIITJEE coaching fees from life insurance payouts, loans; they demand refunds

“We decided to discontinue after my daughter could not cope with the constant pressure. She will complete her Class 12 this year, and after that we will decide what to do next,” said a mother who is a school teacher and had paid a lakh before discontinuing with a coaching institute in Delhi when the child was in Class 11.

Student suicides

A significant motivator behind these legislative moves is the alarming rate of student suicides, particularly in Rajasthan’s coaching hub Kota. However, Agarwal argues that regulations alone will not solve the deeper issues at play.

"Schools have been made redundant. Board exam marks are disregarded in favour of entrance tests like CUET, NEET, and JEE. Moreover, why schedule JEE exams when CBSE Class 12 exams are in progress? This system demoralises students," he said.

He also pointed to the demand-supply gap in medical education as a significant stress factor. "In NEET, 24 lakh students compete for just 24,000 government seats and 58,000 private seats. Parents’ financial and emotional pressures add to the burden. Students should not be forced into the science stream because of parental and societal expectations," he added.

Also read Funding crisis, dismal placements, gender disparity: Is the IIIT experiment failing?

“The coaching scenario today is because of the school system, it did not evolve on its own. Parents come here by choice, not by compulsion. Why can't schools prepare them for entrance,” he said.

While officially valued at Rs 58,000 crore, the actual figure could be close to Rs 1 lakh crore, Agarwal added.

The future of coaching regulations

While Assam and Rajasthan have taken the lead in regulating coaching institutes, the question remains: Should India adopt a national policy? In January, 2024, the ministry of education framed guidelines for the regulation of coaching centres. But with significant variations in coaching culture across states, a one-size-fits-all approach may not be feasible.

Lalan Kumar supports a national-level regulation but stresses the importance of balanced policies. "We need a national framework that ensures consistency but also considers regional differences. Coaching institutes play an important role in education, and regulation should improve, not stifle, their contribution," he said.

At the same time, Agarwal cautioned against excessive government intervention. "Instead of blaming coaching institutes, we need to reform entrance exams, increase government medical and engineering seats, and make schools relevant again," he concluded.