Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court today began hearing the SLP challenging Allahabad High Court’s judgement striking down the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004 as unconstitutional, for final disposal.

Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy opened the submissions on behalf of the petitioners submitting before court that while the dispute started before the High Court as a service dispute, the High Court went on to take suo moto cognizance and wrongfully strike down the Act.

As the bench was hearing Guruswamy's submissions, it went on to observe that the state government in fact has an interest in ensuring that the students fulfil certain basic education requirements so that they are worthy citizens one day.

"The state has a vital interest in ensuring that a quality of education is provided to the students..and also in ensuring that these young children have some broad-based education to lead a proper life apart from religious education, once they leave the institution..", CJI DY Chandrachud has held.

Guruswamy went on to submit that High Court conflated regulation by the Madrasa Board with religious instruction, which was wrong from the examination of the statute as the Board provides a general education. "They conflate regulation with religious instruction and therefore violating secularism...", she submitted.

Court also asked if Madrasas trench in the areas of the UGC under the UGC Act. "Do the Madrasas confer any degree after high school? Unless there is either affiliation from UGC, no institution can confer a degree or carry out any education..", the CJI added.

"There is no contradiction with the UGC guidelines, we applied for recognition and that is pending..", court was told.

In April this year, a bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra had stayed the judgment and issued notice in the Special Leave Petition filed challenging the High Court's decision.

CJI while staying the impugned judgment had noted that while the State has a legitimate public interest in thinking that students should be provided quality education that would help them to lead a life in the society, it would have to be considered if this requires the jettisoning of the whole Act.

Notably, State of UP had informed the bench that it had accepted the judgment of the Allahabad High Court striking down the Madarsa Act. "There will be no problem in absorbing the students...the matter requires consideration, I am not coming in the way of that..", ASG KM Nataraj had added.

The instant SLP has been filed by one Anjum Kadari through Advocate Sanjeev Malhotra challenging the high court’s judgement which struck down the act on the ground that the act is on the ground that the act is against the principles of secularism and articles 14, 21, 21A of the Indian Constitution.

A division bench of the high court comprising Justice Vivek Chaudary and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed the judgement in a petition filed by one Anushuman Singh Rathore who challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa State Board Act 2004 and provisions of the Right of Children of Free and Compulsory Education Act 2012.

The high court said that it was not mandatory for a citizen of this country to be secular by nature and a citizen can have faith in his own religion or in some/every religion or may not have faith in any religion.

Additionally, the high court observed that it was clearly established that education under the Madarsa Act is certainly not equivalent to the education being imparted to the students of other regular educational institutions recognized by the State Primary and High School and Intermediate Boards and, therefore, the educations being imparted in Madarsas is neither ‘quality’ nor ‘universal’ in nature.

Case Title: Anjum Kadari vs. UOI