What's New

Supreme Court Upholds Constitutional Validity of Up Madarsa Act

Syllabus:

GS-2:

Education, Government Policies & Interventions ,Issues Arising Out of Design & Implementation of Policies.

Focus:

The Supreme Court upheld the UP Madarsa Act of 2004, affirming its constitutionality. This ruling protects the rights of minority institutions and clarifies the relationship between secularism, religious education, and the state’s role in regulating educational standards without undermining minority rights.

Supreme Court’s Decision on UP Madarsa Act:

• The Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Act, 2004, overruling the Allahabad High Court’s ruling.
• The Act regulates madarsa education and has been defended as a necessary measure by the government, while the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) opposed it, citing concerns over education quality.
• The verdict brings relief to thousands of madarsa students and institutions, ensuring their continued operation under state regulation.

Understanding the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004:

Overview of the Act:

• Regulates the functioning of madrasas (Islamic educational institutions) in Uttar Pradesh.
• Establishes the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education to supervise madrasa activities.
• Provides a framework for the establishment, recognition, curriculum, and administration of madrasas across the state.

Concerns Regarding the Act:

• Constitutional Violation:
• The Allahabad High Court deemed it unconstitutional, citing violations of secularism and fundamental rights.
• Criticised for promoting education segregated along religious lines, contradicting secularism principles.
• The Act did not comply with the Right to Education (RTE) Act, depriving students of universal education.
• Limited Curriculum:
• Focuses primarily on Islamic studies, with limited emphasis on modern subjects.
• Modern subjects are optional or minimally included in the curriculum, affecting the students’ holistic education.
• Conflict with Higher Education Standards:
• The Act conflicted with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, 1956, as madrasa education did not align with higher education standards.

High Court Ruling:

• Allahabad HC declared the Act unconstitutional, citing violations of secularism and limited access to quality education.
• The ruling directed the state to integrate madrasa students into recognized schools, ensuring quality education.

Constitutional Provisions Regarding Education in India:

• Article 45: The State shall provide early childhood care and education for children until they turn six years.
• Article 21A: Right to Education (RTE) ensures free and compulsory education for children between the ages of six and fourteen.
• Article 46: Promotes education and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and weaker sections.
• Article 28: Provides freedom to attend religious education in institutions administered by the state.
• Article 29: Protects the education of minorities and their interests.
• Article 30: Grants minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions.
• Article 51A(k): Parents must provide education to children aged 6-14.

Initiatives Related to Education:

• Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA): Aims to provide universal elementary education to all children.
• Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA): Focuses on improving secondary education.
• Rashtriya Uchhattar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA): Enhances the quality of higher education.
• National Programme on Technology Enhanced Learning (NPTEL): Promotes online learning in technical subjects.
• PRAGYATA: Guidelines for online education during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Mid-Day Meal Scheme: Provides free meals to students in schools to increase attendance and improve nutrition.
• Beti Bachao Beti Padhao: Promotes education and empowerment of girls.
• PM SHRI Schools: The Prime Minister’s Schools for Rising India, aiming to improve education quality in 100 schools.

ecularism in the Context of Madarsa Education:

• The Supreme Court emphasised that secularism is a “positive concept” involving equal treatment for all religions, citing theR. Bommai case (1994).
• The Court held that the recognition and regulation of madarsa education by the state is a positive step to safeguard the educational rights of minorities.
• Secularism, according to the Court, does not mean the abolition of religious education but ensures religious tolerance and equal opportunities for all communities.

Right to Religious Education and State Regulation:

• The Court affirmed that religious bodies, including minorities, have the fundamental right to establish and manage their own institutions.
• However, state regulation of these institutions must not undermine their minority character.
• The state can impose regulations to ensure quality education, as seen in the debate over madarsa education quality, but cannot infringe upon the right to establish institutions for religious purposes under Article 26.

Quality of Madarsa Education and the Right to Education:

• The judgement acknowledged concerns about the quality of education in madarsas but emphasised that it should not be judged solely based on secular standards.
• The Court referred to the Right to Education (RTE) Act and its exemption for minority institutions, noting that madarsas do not need to conform to the same standards as secular schools.
• Despite some challenges, madarsas are entitled to state protection under Article 26, which guarantees religious bodies the right to manage educational institutions.

Madarsa Graduates and the Path to Higher Education:

• The Supreme Court noted that the non-recognition of madarsa degrees, such as Fazil and Kamil, as equivalent to secular degrees does not undermine the quality of higher education.
• Some universities accept these degrees for theological and oriental studies courses.
• The Court’s decision highlights the need to provide pathways for madarsa graduates to pursue higher education, ensuring that their qualifications are respected within appropriate academic domains.

Challenges to Madarsa Education in Secular Framework:

• Critics argue that the quality of education in madarsas often falls below the expected standards of mainstream education.
• The Supreme Court recognized these concerns but emphasised that madarsas serve a unique role in religious education, which should not be equated with secular schooling.
• The ruling clarifies that the RTE Act’s applicability is exempted for minority institutions, ensuring that madarsas maintain their religious identity while still being accountable for the quality of education.

Implications for Minority Rights and Educational Autonomy:

• The judgement highlights the importance of protecting minority rights, including the right to establish and manage educational institutions.
• State intervention should focus on ensuring educational standards without disrupting the fundamental character of religious institutions.
• By allowing madarsas to operate under state regulations, the Court upholds the principle of educational autonomy for religious minorities, safeguarding their right to practise and propagate their faith through education.

Conclusion:

• The Supreme Court’s verdict reaffirms the importance of maintaining a balance between religious education and state regulation in the context of minority rights.
• Secularism, as understood by the Court, is about positive action to ensure equality while recognizing the importance of religious diversity.
• This judgement not only safeguards the rights of minority institutions but also emphasises the need for quality education that respects both religious freedom and national standards.

Source: Indian Express

Mains Practice Question:

Discuss the implications of the Supreme Court’s judgement on the UP Madarsa Act for religious minorities’ right to education. How does this judgement balance secularism with the protection of minority institutions? Evaluate the role of the state in regulating religious education while ensuring quality standards.