UP Madarsa Education Act | 'Law Regulating Institution Of A Community Not Per Se Against Secularism', Says Supreme Court During Hearing

The Supreme Court today (October 21), while hearing the challenge to the striking down of the 'Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004'. orally observed that laws regulating the educational institutions of a religious community cannot by that fact alone be considered a violation of secularism.A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandracuhd, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing the challenge to Allahabad High Court's March 22 judgment striking down the 'Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004' as unconstitutional.The CJI during the hearings, remarked, "A law per se regulating an institution belonging to a community does not ipso facto violate the principle of secularism."Drawing a parallel to other Statutes regulating religious affairs in different states, the CJI pointed out : "Hindu Religious Endowments Charitable Institutions Act... the law is providing for the proper administration of the religious institutions. That does not offend the secularism. It is in all states, from Maharashtra to Tamil Nadu." He added that it may not be necessary that a religious institutions only limits itself to religious teachings. "A Zoroastrian institution or Buddhist institution may teach a course in medicine, not necessary it only gives religious teachings."The CJI also noted that Article 30 of the Constitution does provide for a community to promote its religious education; only if the institution receives state funds such religious instructions or education cannot be done under Article 28. However, Article 28(2) also carves an exception to that by providing that such a prohibition does not apply to an educational institution which is administered by the State but has been established under any endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall be imparted in such institution. At the same time, the Court also pointed out that it was the State's preliminary duty to ensure that the quality of education given to young children is not compromised as it may deter them in their journey to grow into worthy citizens. "The state govt also has a vital interest in ensuring that all children receiving primary and secondary education must get basic education to become worthy citizens."Previously, the Court, while staying the High Court's decision, also observed that the state has a legitimate public interest to ensure all students get quality education; however, whether this purpose would require jettisoning the entire statute enacted in 2004 needed consideration. HC Errors In Conflating Regulations On Religious Education With 'Religious Instructions' : Sr Adv Menaka Guruswamy Explains The main contention furthered by Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, for the petitioners, was that the High Court has wrongly understood the UP Madarsa Act to be having the purpose of imparting religious instructions rather than seeing the actual purpose- which is providing a scheme of regulations for the education of the Muslim children."The conflation of regulation with religious instructions is patently wrong - the Madarsa Board provides a general education."However, the CJI remarked that the Madarsa Board was only acting to regulate that quality education is imparted. "Board is not the authority which provides education. It is only a regulatory mechanism to ensure the quality."Guruswamy clarified several aspects which the High Court according to her overlooked : (1) the Madarsas provided education in all modern and basic subjects like maths, science, social sciences etc and prescribed relevant NCERT textbooks; (2) the discretion of Madarsas to impart or not to impart teachings for certain subjects gets removed by virtue of the syllabus specifications by the Board; (3) the Madarsa Board only issues certifications for completion of Higher Education after 12th class and does not confer any degree per se as its application seeking recognition to grant University Degrees is still pending with the UGC. During the hearings, Justice Pardiwala pointed at paragraph 66 of the Impugned Judgement which reads : "From the aforesaid it is clear that under the provisions of the Madarsa Act for being recognized by the Madarsa Board it is compulsory for an institution to be setup as a Muslim minority institution and it is also compulsory for a student of Madarsa to study in every class, Islam as a religion, including all its prescriptions, instructions and philosophies, to get promoted to next class. The modern subjects are either absent or are optional and a student can opt to study only one of the optional subjects. Thus, the scheme and purpose of the Madarsa Act is only for promoting and providing education of Islam, its prescriptions, instructions and philosophy and to spread the same. This fact is admitted to the State and the Board and is also not disputed by any of the respondents/interveners." Referring to the above, he asked how the High Court has arrived at such a conclusion. To which, Guruswamy replied ...

UP Madarsa Education Act | 'Law Regulating Institution Of A Community Not Per Se Against Secularism', Says Supreme Court During Hearing

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Anmol Kaur Bawa

UP Madarsa Education Act | 'Law Regulating Institution Of A Community Not Per Se Against Secularism', Says Supreme Court During Hearing

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Anmol Kaur Bawa

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers