The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, which established a Madrasa Board under the Minority Welfare Department to oversee the administration of madrasas.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, overturned a judgment from the Allahabad High Court that had deemed the Act unconstitutional for violating the principles of secularism, a key aspect of the Constitution’s basic structure.
The Supreme Court clarified that laws can be invalidated only for violations of fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution or on legislative competence grounds, not for infringing upon the basic structure.
The Court stated, “Statutes can be struck down only for violation of Part II or legislative competence and not for violating basic structure. The High Court erred in holding that the statute had to be struck down for violating basic structure.”
The Court noted that the Act aims to protect minority rights, aligning with the State’s positive obligations. It emphasized that the legislation seeks to standardize the level of education in madrasas without interfering in their daily operations, ensuring that students can attain a quality education and a viable livelihood.
The Supreme Court had reserved its verdict on this matter on October 22. Earlier, in May, the Bench had stayed the Allahabad High Court’s decision to declare the Act unconstitutional.
Case Background
The Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, defines madarsa education as encompassing Arabic, Urdu, Persian, Islamic studies, philosophy, and other specified subjects. The Act was introduced to empower the Madarsa Education Board in overseeing the functioning of madrasas.
Critics challenged the Act, arguing it contravened secularism by establishing a Board specifically for religious education. They also contended that it failed to ensure quality, compulsory education up to age 14 (as mandated by Article 21A of the Constitution) and did not provide universal education to all children attending madrasas, thus infringing on their fundamental rights.
The Allahabad High Court sided with the petitioners, asserting that while the State has the authority to legislate on education, such education must be secular. The court maintained that the government cannot create a Board for religious education that caters to a single religion, as this would violate both secular principles and Article 14, which guarantees equal treatment under the law.
The High Court further asserted that education provided under the Madarsa Act did not equate to the education available in recognized state schools, lacking the required quality and universality. It pointed out that while students from various religious backgrounds receive education in modern subjects, the limited curriculum offered in madrasas amounted to a violation of Articles 21 and 21A.
Moreover, the High Court noted that the Act encroached upon a domain reserved for the Central government, as higher education regulation falls within its purview.
The Act conferred powers to the Board to prescribe courses and materials, including undergraduate and postgraduate programs, which the High Court ruled violated Article 246(1) of the Constitution that grants Parliament exclusive legislative power over such subjects.
The Supreme Court’s ruling reaffirms the legislative framework surrounding madrasas in Uttar Pradesh while emphasizing the importance of protecting minority rights within the constitutional framework.
SC Upholds Validity Of UP Board Of Madarsa Education Act
