Striking Down Entire Madarsa Education Act Wrong, Only Violative Provisions Needed To Be Nullified: UP Govt To Supreme Court

The State of Uttar Pradesh told the Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 22) that the Allahabad High Court should not have struck down the UP Board of Madarsa Education 2004 in its entirety. 

Additional Solicitor General of India KM Nataraj, appearing for the State, submitted that the High Court should have only struck down the provisions which are violative of the fundamental rights instead of nullifying the entire regulatory framework.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra was hearing a batch of appeals filed against the Allahabad High Court's March 22 judgment which struck down the UP Board of Madarsa Education, 2004 on the ground that it violated the principles of secularism. The Supreme Court had in April stayed the operation of the High Court's judgment.

Today, ASG informed the Court that the State has not filed any Special Leave Petition against the High Court's judgment, deciding to accept it. 

"Are you therefore standing by the validity of the Act? Because it's an Act of the state. Do we take it on record that you stand by the validity of the Act?" CJI asked.

ASG replied that before the High Court, the State had filed an affidavit defending the Act and hence, it cannot deviate from that stand. However, now that the High Court has struck down the law as unconstitutional, the State has decided to accept the judgment.

CJI pointed out that the State had argued(before the High Court) that it had powers to intervene as per the Act if the quality of education imparted was low.

Nataraj replied, "striking down of the Act completely would be incorrect. It is not a case of legislative competence but of violation of fundamental rights for which the entire legislation need not be struck down."

He informed that as per a Government order, the Madrasa Schools are treated as equivalent to other schools. At this juncture, Justice Pardiwala asked, "If a student who has studied in Madarsa upto 12th, the certificate issued after that can be used to get B.com degree admission etc?". The ASG replied in the affirmative.

The bench also sought clarity on whether the Madarsas can issue degree certificates and whether it would violate the UGC Act. The bench has requested for clarity on this aspect from the counsel representing the UGC.

Even if the Madarsas are conferring degrees, that cannot be a reason to strike down the UP Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004, the CJI observed.

During the hearing, CJI referred to Section 1(5) of the Right to Education Act, which exempts "Madrasas, Vedic Pathsalas and educational institutions primarily imparting religious instruction" from the RTE Act. If the Madarsas are imparting secular education, would the RTE Act apply to them, asked the CJI, wondering whether the phrase "educational institutions primarily imparting religious instruction" should be read as disjunctive from Madrasas.

ASG submitted that the right to compulsory education under Article 21A of the Constitution should be given a meaningful interpretation to include modern education by academic experts.

Yesterday, the Court had heard the petitioners' arguments. The State completed its submissions and the Court will hear the NCPCR and other respondents afternoon.

Live updates can be tracked here.

Case Title : Anjum Kadari and another v. Union of India and others Diary No. 14432-2024, Managers Association Madaris Arabiya UP v. Union of India SLP(C) No. 7821/2024 and connected matters.