India News Get -CareerSupreme Court upheld Madrasa Act CJI Chandrachud Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Act
The Supreme Court has delivered an important ruling for children studying in Madarsa, Uttar Pradesh. The court upheld the validity of the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Act. The Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the Allahabad High Court which, while striking down the law, had declared the UP Madrasa Act to be a violation of secularism. The Supreme Court also declared Kamil and Fazil’s madrassa degrees unconstitutional.
In current affairs we will know what the Supreme Court said in its decision, what is the Madrasa Act, why the High Court declared it unconstitutional and now what will be the change in Madrasa education due to the decision of the Supreme Court…
Madrasa law passed to take control of government
The Madrasa Education Act was passed in Uttar Pradesh in 2004 under the Mulayam Singh Yadav government. Under the Act, a framework has been created for the opening, recognition and administration of madrassas in Uttar Pradesh. After this, the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board was established to supervise and monitor the activities of madrasas. Certain eligibility criteria have been set to obtain recognition from the board of directors. The council was responsible for preparing the madrassa curriculum, teaching materials and teacher training.
Court application against Madarsa law, 5 major problems raised
The first petition against the Madrasa Act was filed in 2012 by Sirajul Haq, director of a madrasa named Darul Uloom Warsiya. Then, in 2014, the petition was filed by Abdul Aziz, secretary of the Minority Protection Department of the UP government and in 2019, Mohammad Javed from Lucknow. After this, in 2020, Raijul Mustafa had filed two petitions. Anshuman Singh Rathore filed the petition in 2023. The National Commission for Child Welfare (NCPCR) also said that while one has the right to religious education, it cannot be accepted as a alternative to mainstream education. The nature of all these cases was the same. Therefore, the Allahabad High Court heard all the petitions together.
In these petitions, the law encountered opposition on these 5 points:
The Madrasa Act, which promotes separate education on religious grounds, is against the principle of secularism and madrasas fail to ensure quality education up to the age of 14, as per Article 21A of the Constitution, which deals with the right to education. Due to the exclusion of madrassas from the Right to Education Act, 2009, children cannot benefit from quality education. Madrassas provide more religious education on Islam than teaching of modern subjects. This law is contrary to section 22 of the University Grants Commission. . In which there are rules for the award of higher education degrees.
The problem has gained momentum due to the UP government’s probe into illegal madrassas.
The UP government said it had received information from security agencies that the madrassas were being run illegally. Based on this, the Uttar Pradesh Council and the government’s minority affairs department decided to conduct the survey. Then, a team of 5 members was constituted in each district and a survey of madrassas was conducted from September 10, 2022 to November 15, 2022. This deadline was later extended to November 30.
During the survey, around 8,441 madrassas were found in the state which were unrecognized. The UP government had constituted the SIT in October 2023. The SIT is investigating allegations of foreign funding of madrassas. There are currently 25,000 madrassas in Uttar Pradesh. Of these, around 16,500 madrassas have received recognition from the National Madrassa Education Council. Among these, 560 madrassas benefit from government subsidies.
High Court declares Madrasa Act unconstitutional
On March 22, 2024, the Allahabad High Court, after hearing the petitions, struck down the Madrasa Education Act, declaring it unconstitutional. The Lucknow court declared that this law was against secularism, according to Articles 14, 15 (right to equality) and 21-A (right to education) of the Indian Constitution:
The Madarsa board discriminated against children’s education. While children of all religions receive modern education in all subjects, then children of a particular religion should not be limited to madrassa education.
The court also ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to come up with a plan to shift children from madrassas to recognized schools.
The Supreme Court stayed the High Court decision
Anjum Qadri, director of another madrasa, Azizia Ijazutul Uloom, had challenged the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court. The first hearing took place at the Supreme Court on April 5, 2024. The court stayed the High Court’s decision.
The court said,
The High Court is not prima facie right. It is false to say that Madrasa law violates secularism. It is also not correct to give instructions to transfer madrassa students to another school. Religious education has never been a curse in the country. How are Buddhist monks trained?
The UP government had also defended the Madrasa Act in the High Court. Then the court declared: “Secularism means “live and let live”. If the government says that secular education should also be provided to madrassa children, this is the feeling of the country.
A hearing was held in the Supreme Court on October 22 and the court reserved the decision.
Madrasa Act is constitutional, Supreme Court highlights 2 High Court errors
On November 5, 2004, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by CJI DY Chandrachud, while delivering its verdict, pointed out two errors in the High Court’s decision…
“The High Court erred in assuming that education in madrassas violates Article 21 relating to the right to education. Because the right to education does not apply to minority educational institutions, it is also erroneous to believe that the right to open a madrassa to provide religious education is protected by Article 30. Because even if madrassas provide religious education, they essentially constitute teaching. The Madrassa Act, therefore, cannot go beyond the legislative power granted to the State Government under the Concurrent List.
Now, with the Supreme Court’s decision, madrassas will no longer be able to issue diplomas to Kamil and Fazil. According to the court’s decision, madrassas can issue their diplomas up to class 12, but will not be able to issue the diplomas of Kamil and Fazil.
related to education…
Underwear-wearing student arrested in Iran: protesting against hijab on university campus; The college declared him mentally ill.
A video from an Iranian university is going viral on social media, in which guards arrest a young girl in her underwear. The girl is said to have taken off her clothes to protest Iran’s strict dress code (compulsory wearing of the hijab). ..