Source: The Indian Express 

Introduction 

The Supreme Court of India, while hearing challenges to the Allahabad High Court's decision striking down the UP Board of Madrasa Education Act 2004, observed that laws regulating religious educational institutions don't automatically violate secularism. The Court's stance suggests that regulation of madrasa education serves the national interest by ensuring quality education while respecting religious freedom. 

What is the Background and Court Observation of Anjum Kadari and another v. Union of India? 

Background  

• The case originated from a writ petition filed in Allahabad High Court 
• The petition challenged:  
  • The constitutional validity of UP Madrasa Board 
  • The management of Madrasas by the Minority Welfare Department 
  • Related issues concerning both Union and State government involvement 
• Legislative Framework: 
  • The UP Board of Madrasa Education Act 2004 established different levels of education:  
    • Tahtania (equivalent to classes 1-5) 
    • Fauquania (equivalent to classes 6-8) 
    • Munshi (equivalent to class 10) 
    • Alim (equivalent to classes 11-12) 
    • Higher education courses: Kamil and Fazil (received no state funding) 
• High Court's Findings: 
  • Declared the Act Ultra Vires (beyond legal authority) 
  • Found that the Act made it compulsory for:  
    • Institutions to be set up as Muslim minority institutions 
    • Students to study Islam in every class to get promoted 
  • Concluded that modern subjects were either absent or optional 
  • Directed UP Government to create a scheme to integrate madrasa students into formal education 
• Related Developments: 
  • NCPCR (National Commission for Protection of Child Rights) issued communications to:  
    • Withdraw recognition of Madrasas not compliant with Right to Education Act 2009 
    • Conduct inspection of all Madrasas 
  • Supreme Court stayed these NCPCR communications 
• Contentions by Petitioners: 
  • Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy argued:  
    • High Court wrongly interpreted the Act's purpose 
    • Madrasas provided education in modern subjects (math, science, social sciences) 
    • Used NCERT textbooks 
    • Board only issued certifications, not university degrees 
• State's Position: 
  • UP government supported the constitutionality of the 2004 Act 
  • Argued that entire legislation couldn't be struck down for partial constitutional violations 
  • Emphasized the regulatory role of the Act in maintaining educational standards 
• Funding Structure: 
  • State only provided teachers' salaries 
  • Madrasas managed other expenses (hostel, travel) independently 
  • This funding structure affected their classification under Article 28 of the Constitution 

Court Observation

• On Secularism and Regulation: 
  • The CJI emphasized that laws regulating religious institutions don't automatically violate secularism 
  • Drew parallels to Hindu Religious Endowments Acts in various states that regulate religious institutions 
  • Stressed that "secularism means live and let live" 
• On Education Standards: 
  • State's duty to ensure quality education for children to become worthy citizens 
  • Noted that religious institutions aren't limited to religious teachings only 
  • Emphasized that the state has regulatory powers under Section 20 of the Act to maintain educational standards 
• On Constitutional Provisions: 
  • Article 30 which allows communities to promote religious education 
  • Noted Article 28's provisions regarding religious instruction in state-funded institutions 
  • Emphasized that complete removal of the Act would be counterproductive to national interests 
• On Practical Implications: 
  • Warned that striking down the Act wouldn't eliminate madrasas but would leave them unregulated 
  • Suggested that regulation helps mainstream students while preserving religious education 
  • Emphasized the importance of bringing together different educational streams rather than creating silos. 

What are the Grounds on Which the Allahabad High Court Struck Down the UP Board of Madrasa Education Act 2004? 

• Violation of Secularism Principle:  
  • The High Court found that by making Islamic religious education compulsory while keeping modern subjects optional, the Act violated the constitutional principle of secularism which requires equal treatment of all religions by the state. 
• Discriminatory Educational Framework:  
  • The court held that the Act created a discriminatory educational framework by favoring one particular religion through state policy, which goes against the state's duty to maintain religious neutrality. 
• Right to Education Violation:  
  • The Act was found to violate Article 21A of the Constitution and the Right to Education Act 2009, as the madrasa curriculum didn't meet the standards of quality education required for children aged 6-14 years. 
• UGC Act Conflict:  
  • The High Court determined that the Madrasa Board's power to grant degrees (like Kamil and Fazil) conflicted with the UGC Act 1956, which exclusively authorizes recognized universities to confer degrees. 
• Inadequate Modern Education:  
  • The court criticized the Act for not ensuring comprehensive modern education for madrasa students, noting that the emphasis on religious instruction over modern subjects compromised students' educational development. 
• Non-Compliance with Educational Standards: 
  • The High Court found that the Act failed to meet the basic educational standards required by law, particularly in ensuring adequate coverage of modern subjects essential for students' overall development.

UP Board of Madrasa Education Act 2004

• About: 
  • The UP Board of Madrasa Education Act 2004 is a significant legislative framework aimed at regulating and promoting the education system of madrasas in the state of Uttar Pradesh, India. 
  • This act seeks to provide a structured approach to madrasa education, ensuring that these institutions adhere to certain educational standards while also preserving their unique cultural and religious identity.  
  • The act plays a crucial role in integrating madrasa education with the broader educational landscape of the state, thereby enhancing the quality of education for students enrolled in these institutions. 
• Provisions of the Act 
  • Establishment of the Board: The act establishes the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madrasa Education, which is responsible for overseeing the administration and regulation of madrasa education in the state. 
  • Curriculum Development: The board is tasked with developing a standardized curriculum that incorporates both religious and secular subjects, ensuring a holistic educational experience for students. 
  • Recognition and Affiliation: The act provides a framework for the recognition and affiliation of madrasas, allowing them to operate under the guidelines set by the board. This recognition is essential for the legitimacy and credibility of madrasa education. 
  • Examinations and Certification: The board is responsible for conducting examinations and issuing certificates to students who complete their education in affiliated madrasas, thereby facilitating their further education and employment opportunities. 
  • Financial Support: The act outlines provisions for financial assistance and grants to madrasas, enabling them to improve infrastructure, resources, and overall educational quality. 
  • Teacher Training and Qualifications: The act emphasizes the importance of qualified teachers in madrasas and includes provisions for their training and professional development. 
• Impact on Madrasa Education 
  • The UP Board of Madrasa Education Act 2004 has had a profound impact on the madrasa education system in Uttar Pradesh.  
  • By establishing a regulatory framework, the act has helped to enhance the quality of education, promote inclusivity, and ensure that students receive a well-rounded education.  
  • It has also facilitated the integration of madrasa students into the mainstream education system, providing them with better opportunities for higher education and employment. 

Secularism in Indian Constitution  

• About: 
  • Secularism refers to the separation of religion from political, social, and educational institutions.  
  • Secularism is a fundamental principle enshrined in the Indian Constitution, reflecting the country's commitment to maintaining a neutral stance towards all religions. 
  • In Indian Constitution, it implies that the state treats all religions equally and does not favor or discriminate against any religion.  
• Constitutional Provisions 
  • Article 14: Right to Equality 
    • Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws to all individuals, irrespective of their religion.  
    • This provision ensures that no individual is discriminated against based on their religious beliefs. 
  • Article 15: Prohibition of Discrimination 
    • Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This article reinforces the secular nature of the state by ensuring that individuals are treated equally, regardless of their religious affiliations. 
  • Article 25: Freedom of Religion 
    • Article 25 grants individuals the freedom to profess, practice, and propagate their religion.  
    • This right is subject to public order, morality, and health, ensuring that the exercise of religious freedom does not infringe upon the rights of others. 
  • Article 26: Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs 
    • Article 26 allows religious denominations to manage their own affairs in matters of religion.  
    • This provision empowers communities to maintain their religious practices while adhering to the secular framework of the state. 
  • Article 30: Rights of Minorities 
    • Article 30 provides minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.  
    • This article is significant in promoting the cultural and educational rights of religious minorities, thereby fostering an inclusive society. 

Conclusion  

The Supreme Court's position highlights the delicate balance between religious freedom and educational standards in India's secular framework. The Court emphasized that rather than completely striking down madrasa regulations, it's more beneficial to maintain oversight that ensures quality education while respecting religious institutions. This approach aims to mainstream students while preserving India's diverse religious and cultural heritage.