The Aryavarth Express
Agency(New Delhi): The Supreme Court on Friday halted the Allahabad High Court’s decision that had previously declared the ‘Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004’ unconstitutional. This stay issued by a panel including Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, is a significant development, suggesting that the High Court may have misinterpreted the law’s regulatory intent.
The justices remarked that the challenges presented against the High Court’s ruling necessitate a more detailed examination. Consequently, notices have been dispatched to the Uttar Pradesh and central governments, along with the Madrasa Board, as the case continues its progress in the judicial system.
This intervention by the Supreme Court is seen as a major relief for the approximately 16,000 madrasas across Uttar Pradesh, affecting nearly 17 lakh students and 10,000 educators who were impacted by the initial ruling. The court highlighted that the 2004 statute does not involve any religious teachings but merely aims to regulate madrasa education to ensure its quality.
The controversy stems from the High Court’s assertion that creating such a Board could potentially breach principles of secularism by conflating madrasa education with the Board’s regulatory powers. Instead of abolishing the Act, the Supreme Court suggested that improving educational standards through appropriate directives would be a more suitable approach.
The challenge to the High Court’s ruling was brought forth by several organizations including the Managers Association Madaris Arabiya(UP), All India Teachers Association Madaris Arabiya (New Delhi), and others, who argued that the sudden change would disrupt a long-standing educational framework. The Supreme Court has scheduled a final hearing for these petitions in July.
Meanwhile, during the court proceedings, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhi, representing the madrasa managers, argued that integrating 17 lakh students into the state education system abruptly would pose severe challenges. On the other hand, the Attorney General for India, R. Venkataramani, supported the High Court’s decision, clarifying that it would not halt madrasa operations but simply end state financial support.
This legal battle underscores the complexities involved in regulating education systems that cater to specific communities while aligning with national educational standards and constitutional mandates.
