Context:

The Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004.

Background to the Case

The case was about the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004. The Allahabad High Court quashed the Act, arguing that it violated secularism, the right to education, and is in conflict with central laws. The Supreme Court now upheld the Act's constitutionality.

UP Madarsa Act 2004

It sets the legal framework for Madarsa education, which includes religious education alongside the curriculum set by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT).

It established the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education. Section 9 of the Act specifies the functions, which include preparing and prescribing course material as well as conducting exams for all courses ranging from 'Maulvi' (equivalent to Class 10) to 'Fazil' (equivalent to a Master's).

What were the grounds on which the Allahabad High Court struck down the Act?

The court claimed that compulsory religious education in madrasas violated the principle of secularism by prioritizing religious instruction over secular subjects.

The court claimed that the Act failed to provide quality modern education, thus violating Article 21A, which guarantees free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14.

The court ruled that the Act conflicted with the University Grants Commission Act of 1956, because only universities or deemed universities, not madrasas, can grant degrees.

The Supreme Court considered two key issues

Religious Education v/s Religious Instruction

The Supreme Court considered whether madrasas provide secular religious education or enforce religious instruction, which is prohibited in state-recognized schools by Article 28 of the Constitution, but teaching about religions for broader knowledge and communal harmony is permitted.

In (Aruna Roy v/s Union of India, 2002) case, the Supreme Court distinguished between "religious education" (learning about religion) and "religious instruction" (learning to practice a specific religion).

Should the entire law be struck down?

The Allahabad High Court completely rejected the Madarsa Act, however, the Supreme Court considered instead of rejecting the entire law, possibly the problematic parts could be restricted while keeping the madrasas open to ensure secular education without disrupting traditions.

The Chief Justice suggested that simply repealing the law could be more harmful than beneficial. The state could amend the Act to make education more secular while still honouring the community's traditions.

Highlights of the Supreme Court verdict

The Supreme Court bench upheld the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Education Act.

The court said that madarsas should also provide secular education to ensure that students receive a comprehensive education, the Act must be implemented with appropriate regulations to balance religious and secular education.

The court stressed that secular principles should apply to all institutions that provide religious education; including gurukuls and convent schools.

Way Forward

The judgment explains the relationship between secular and religious education in India. It ensures that madrasas can continue to function, but they must align their educational models to include secular subjects, in accordance with the constitutional principles of secularism and the right to education.

Must Read Articles:

SC'S VERDICT ON MADARSA EDUCATION ACT

MADRASAS

Source:

Indian Express