Does madarsa education violate secularism? SC to decide
- October 24, 2024
- Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
- Category: DPN Topics
Does madarsa education violate secularism? SC to decide
Sub: Polity
Sec: Constitution
Context:
The Allahabad High Court had, in March 2024, struck down the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 (Madarsa Act).
The ruling was challenged in the Supreme Court, and the SC stayed the HC verdict until it decided the validity of the UP law. The case is still pending with the Supreme Court.
NCPCR Directive:
With the case pending, the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued two communications in June this year, directing the UP government to investigate recognised madrasas and admit non-Muslim students to schools imparting formal education.
It also requested the Centre to direct all states and Union Territories to inspect madrasas and withdraw recognition of those that were not compliant with the Right to Education Act, 2009.
Both notifications were stayed by the Supreme Court on October 21.
The Madarsa Act, 2004:
- The Act provides the legal framework for madarsa education in Uttar Pradesh where, apart from the curriculum of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), religious education is imparted as well.
- Thus, it integrates both religious and secular subjects.
- It established the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education, which oversees curriculum preparation, course material, and examination for various levels of madarsa education.
Key Statistics:
As of 2018-19, India had a total of 24,010 madrasas, with over 60% located in Uttar Pradesh.
Approximately 1.69 lakh students appeared for UP madarsa education board examinations equivalent to Class 10 and Class 12 in 2023.
Allahabad High Court’s Decision:
On March 22, 2024, the Allahabad High Court struck down the Madarsa Act on three primary grounds:
Secularism: The court argued that the Act violated the principle of secularism by mandating religious education. The court held that the government has a duty to provide secular education, and cannot discriminate by providing education based on religion.
Right to Education: The HC held that the Act failed to provide quality education in modern subjects, thus infringing upon Article 21A of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen.
Conflict with Central Law: It was determined that the Act’s provisions conflicted with the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, which stipulates that only recognized universities can grant degrees and no other person or authority, including any Madarsa or the Madarsa Board, can confer any degree.
Religious Education vs. Religious Instruction:
- The Supreme Court previously distinguished between the two. Religious instruction, which includes mandatory attendance for worship, is not allowed in state-recognized institutions under Article 28.
- In contrast, religious education aims to promote understanding among different religions.
- Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy argued that the High Court mistakenly equated regulation with religious instruction, leading to a misunderstanding of secularism.
- Impact of the case:
- All educational institutions that impart some manner of religious education, such as gurukuls and convent schools will be affected by the decision of the Supreme Court on how the principles of secularism interact with the functioning of these institutions.