Supreme Court Upholds Legitimacy of UP Madarsa Education Act
The Supreme Court has overturned the Allahabad High Court’s March ruling, which had declared the 2004 Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act unconstitutional. In a decision delivered on Tuesday, a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud emphasized the Uttar Pradesh government’s crucial role in ensuring that madrasas meet modern educational standards, directing the state to transfer students to other schools when necessary.
The Court clarified that madrasas are not authorized to confer higher education degrees, as this would violate the University Grants Commission Act. CJI Chandrachud stated, “We have upheld the validity of the UP madrassa law, and a statute can only be struck down if the state lacks legislative competence.” He explained that the framework of the Act aims to standardize education across madrasas.
On October 22, the Supreme Court reserved judgment on eight petitions challenging the high court’s decision, including one filed by Anjum Kadari.
Background of the Allahabad High Court Verdict
On March 22, the Allahabad High Court ruled the Act unconstitutional, claiming it violated the principles of secularism and ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to integrate madrasa students into the formal education system. On April 5, the CJI-led bench temporarily stayed the high court’s decision, offering relief to around 1.7 million madrasa students.
During hearings, CJI Chandrachud emphasized that secularism is about “live and let live.” He argued that regulating madrasas aligns with national interests and helps preserve India’s rich cultural heritage, rather than isolating minorities.
The Uttar Pradesh government reiterated its support for the 2004 Act, arguing that the high court’s ruling was inappropriate. Agreeing with senior lawyer Mukul Rohatgi, CJI Chandrachud stated, “Secularism means – live and let live.” He questioned the state government, asking, “Isn’t it in our national interest to regulate madrasas?”
The bench warned against ignoring India’s centuries-old historical context, asserting that upholding the law was essential to avoid creating isolated communities. CJI Chandrachud highlighted the need to maintain India as a melting pot of cultures and religions, stressing that the country should not segregate its diverse communities.
The bench expressed concern about the quality of education received by madrasa students, stating that invalidating the law could be harmful. It acknowledged the significance of religious education across all communities, including Hindus, Sikhs, and Christians, advocating for integration rather than separation.
The Supreme Court’s deliberations included extensive arguments from various legal representatives over two days, addressing the complex legal issues surrounding the UP Madarsa Education Act.
