New Delhi:
Supreme Court
on Friday stayed an
Allahabad HC
judgment that had ordered relocation of 17 lakh students studying in 16,000 madrassas in UP even as it expressed concern over alleged non-compulsory teaching of maths, science and social studies in these community-run schools and acknowledged the state was duty-bound to ensure quality
education
in these Islamic institutions.
A three-judge bench of CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said, “If the object and purpose of the PIL (trigger for HC’s order) was to ensure that secular education in core subjects, besides languages, is imparted in madrassas, the remedy would not lie in striking down UP Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004.”
While staying the March 22 HC judgment that had struck down the 2004 Act as “non-secular” and hence “unconstitutional”, SC while dictating the interim order in open court, said, “It would have been appropriate if HC had issued suitable directions to ensure all (such) students aren’t deprived of the quality of education made available by state govt in other institutions.”
HC’s ruling had rendered the future of 10,000-odd madrassa teachers uncertain.
HC misdirected itself into junking madrassa Act: SC
SC was, though, concerned over alleged non-imparting of education in modern subjects in madrassas and feared it could affect ability of madrassa students to participate in open competitive examinations. CJI said, "The state does have a legitimate public interest in ensuring students who are pursuing primary, secondary or higher secondary education in all institutions receive education of a requisite quality and standard which makes them qualified enough to pursue a dignified existence upon receiving degrees which are awarded to them."
SC bench comprising CJI, Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said instead of directing improvement in quality of madrassa education, Allahabad HC misdirected itself into quashing the Act, which was a regulatory framework unconcerned with quality of education being imparted in Islamic educational institutions.
The bench differentiated between purpose of the 2004 law, whose validity was defended by UP govt before HC in its pleadings and submissions but questioned in SC, and object of Article 28(1) of the Constitution prohibiting religious instructions in fully govt-aided educational institutions. "In striking down the 2004 Act, HC prima facie has misconstrued provisions of the Act, which per se does not mandate imparting of religious instructions in madrassas maintained out of state funds," it said.
Arguments of a battery of senior advocates found acceptance with the bench, which said, "Finding of HC that establishment of the board will amount to breach of principles of secularism appears to conflate the concept of madrassa education with regulatory power given to the board."
However, the bench shared attorney general R Venkataramani's concern that entanglement of religion with any education is a suspect issue. AG said under HC order, madrassas will not be closed down, but will stop receiving state aid.
CJI said, "Whether this purpose (of providing quality education in madrassas) will require jettisoning the entire statute enacted by the legislature in 2004 would merit serious consideration."
Court asked the state to file its response by May 31 and posted the matter for final hearing in second week of July.
We also published the following articles recently
SC stays HC order declaring UP Madrassa Act 'unconstitutional'
Supreme Court halted Allahabad HC's order relocating 17 lakh UP madrassa students, emphasizing concerns on core subjects teaching quality, questioning the UP Board of Madarsa Education Act, and the impact on madrassa teachers and education quality.
English (US) ·