Relief to 17 lakh students: SC deems UP Madrassa Act Constitutional
text_fields
The Supreme Court order stayed the Allahabad High Court order that had scrapped the UP Board of Madarsa Education Act, providing relief to 17 lakh madrassa students and 10,000 madrassa teachers in Uttar Pradesh whose studies and livelihoods had been in question since then.
The apex court, presided over by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, alongside Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, halted the enforcement of the High Court's judgment, scheduling a final hearing for the second week of July.
The High Court had declared the Act unconstitutional, citing violations of secular principles and fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court bench reviewed the Act and found its primary objective to be regulatory, asserting that the establishment of the board under it did not inherently violate secular principles. Contrary to the High Court's ruling, the apex court clarified that the Act did not impose religious instruction in state-funded educational institutions.
The Supreme Court criticized the High Court's interpretation, stating that it appeared to conflate madrasa education with the Act's regulatory powers. It emphasized that the Act did not inherently promote religious instruction in state-funded educational institutions, citing Article 28(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits religious education in such institutions. The Court underscored the need for quality secular education in core subjects for all students, including those in madrasas.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court expressed concerns about the High Court's directive to relocate all students affected by its ruling. With approximately 17 lakh students enrolled in these institutions, the Court deemed the relocation order unwarranted and potentially disruptive to their education.
It highlighted the importance of preserving students' choices and ensuring they receive a quality education, irrespective of the institution they attend.
The state government's stance also came under scrutiny, as it initially supported the Act but later indicated acceptance of the High Court's judgment. The Supreme Court noted the government's obligation to defend the statute enacted in 2004 and urged careful consideration before abandoning it entirely. The Court directed the state to submit its counter affidavit by May 31, with the appellants given until June 30 to respond.
The Allahabad High Court's decision to strike down the Act was based on several grounds, including alleged violations of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, and concerns regarding the syllabus and curriculum of madrasa education.
The High Court argued that the syllabi required students to study Islam and its doctrines to progress, with modern subjects offered as optional. It also questioned the Act's compatibility with modern educational standards.