नॉट वॉरंटेड": सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यूपी के मदरसों पर प्रतिबंध लगाया

"Not Warranted": Supreme Court Puts On Hold Banning Of UP Madrassas

New Delhi: In a significant development, the Supreme Court has provided a temporary reprieve to approximately 17 lakh madrassa students in Uttar Pradesh by staying an Allahabad High Court order that invalidated the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004. This decision allows around 16,000 madrassas in the state to continue operating under the provisions of the 2004 law. A bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked that the high court's decision appeared to be incorrect on the surface and issued notices to the Uttar Pradesh and central governments, as well as the Madrassa board. The Allahabad High Court had recently declared the 2004 law as "unconstitutional," citing a violation of the principle of secularism, and had directed the government to integrate madrassa students into the formal education system. The Supreme Court, however, put the high court's decision on hold, stating that the objectives of the Madrassa Board are primarily regulatory and do not infringe upon secularism. Chief Justice Chandrachud expressed concern over the high court's directive to relocate students, which would affect the 17 lakh students enrolled in these institutions. He emphasized that if the intent of the PIL (Public Interest Litigation) was to ensure that madrassas provide secular education in core subjects such as mathematics, science, history, and languages, repealing the provisions of the Madarsa Act 2004 would not be an appropriate solution. Both the central and state governments supported the high court's judgment in the Supreme Court, with the central government suggesting that any suspected entanglement of religion and education must be thoroughly debated. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the madrassas, argued that religious education should not be equated with religious instruction. He raised concerns that the high court's order would negatively impact 10,000 madrassa teachers and 17 lakh students. However, the state government assured that it had made arrangements for the teachers and students. Singhvi further argued that it is incorrect to suggest that madrassa education lacks quality, universality, or diversity. He pointed out that singling out madrassas for a ban would be discriminatory, citing the Supreme Court's stance in the 2002 Aruna Roy vs Union of India verdict. The Chief Justice acknowledged that the issues raised in the case require careful consideration and scheduled further hearings for the second week of July.

News Reference

Follow the Hindeez on Google News
Follow the Hindeez channel on WhatsApp