UP Madarsa Education Act: SC dismisses Allahabad High Court’s ruling to strike down Madarsa law

The Supreme Court recently temporarily suspended the Allahabad High Court’s decision to invalidate the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, which the high court had labeled as “unconstitutional”.

In the previous month, the Allahabad High Court had directed the UP government to transition the existing students of the Madarsa board into the regular education system. This process, however, was halted by the Supreme Court’s interim stay.

What is Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act?

The Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, established in 2004, was designed to regulate madrassa education, which includes education in Arabic, Urdu, Persian, Islamic studies, Tibb (traditional medicine), philosophy, and other specified branches.

Uttar Pradesh is home to approximately 25,000 madrassas, with 16,500 of them recognized by the Uttar Pradesh Madrassa Education Board. Among these, 560 madrassas receive government grants. In addition, there are 8,500 unregistered madrassas in the state.

The Madarsa Education Board confers undergraduate and post-graduate degrees, known as Kamil and Fazil respectively. The board also awards diplomas, known as Qari, and other academic distinctions. It conducts exams for the Munshi and Maulvi (Class X) and Alim (Class XII) courses.

The board is also responsible for prescribing courses, textbooks, reference books, and other instructional materials for Tahtania, Fauquania, Munshi, Maulavi, Alim, Kamil, and Fazil.

Allahabad HC’s Decision to Strike Down Madarsa Education Act

The Allahabad High Court invalidated the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, declaring it “unconstitutional” and in violation of the principle of secularism. The high court was considering a petition that challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Board and objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department instead of the education department.

The petitioner and their counsel argued that the Madarsa Act contravenes the principles of secularism, which form the basic structure of the Constitution, fails to provide quality compulsory education up to the age of 14 years/Class-VIII as mandated under Article 21-A, and fails to provide universal and quality school education to all children studying in madrassas. They claimed that this violates the Fundamental Rights of the students of the madrassas.

The Supreme Court, while issuing an interim stay on the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, stated that the high court’s intention was regulatory. The apex court also disagreed with the Allahabad High Court’s belief that the madrassas would violate secularism.

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud issued notices to the Centre, Uttar Pradesh government, and others regarding the pleas against the high court order. The bench, which also included Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, stated that the establishment of the board would not breach secularism and that the Allahabad High Court had misinterpreted the provisions of the 2004 act, which does not provide for religious instruction and is regulatory in nature.

You might also be interested in – Allahabad HC declares UP Madarsa law as ‘Unconstitutional’