Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

Supreme Court's bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra has today upheld the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004.

Court has accordingly struck down the Allahabad High Court's decision striking down the state's legislation.

"While the Marasas do impart religious instruction their primary aim is to provide education. The Madrasa Act to the extent that it aims to impart higher education is in contravention to UGC Act. Thus, only the provisions which relate to Faazil and Kaamil are unconstitutional...", the bench has further held.

It has been observed that the High Court erred in holding that the education provided under the Act is violative of Article 21 as Madrasa Act secures the interest of the minority community in Uttar Pradesh.

"A statue cannot be struck down for violating the basic structure of the constitution. The High Court has erred in holding so...", the Supreme Court has said today.

Two weeks back, Supreme Court had reserved its judgment on the petition filed by one Anjum Kadari challenging the striking down of Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004.

Looking at the salutary purpose of the Madrasa Act, the Supreme Court had earlier questioned if it was not in the national interest to recognize the Madrasas and regulate them accordingly.

Justice Pardiwala also questioned if it could be argued that all those students who decide to undertake education in these institutions it was detrimental to their interest and they were deprived.

Notably, State of Uttar Pradesh told the Supreme Court that the Allahabad High Court's decision to strike down the entire Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004 was not correct.

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the state government, submitted that striking down of entire Act was not at all correct and only some of the provisions should have been stuck down if needed.

On October 21st, Supreme Court 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.

The Supreme Court in April this year, 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.

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