On Friday, the Allahabad High Court deemed the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act (2004) unconstitutional and in violation of secularism. The court instructed the state government to integrate current madrasa students into the regular education system. The ruling came in response to a petition filed by Anshuman Singh Rathore. The board’s chairman, Iftikhar Ahmed Javed, stated that they would examine the decision and plan their next steps.
After two decades, the Madrasa Education Act has been deemed unconstitutional, possibly due to an error. The board’s lawyers failed to adequately represent the case in court. The order should be appealed in the Supreme Court, according to Maulana Khalid Rashid Farangi Mahali, a senior member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB).
The petitioner contested the legality of the Uttar Pradesh Madarsa Board and opposed the Minority Welfare Department’s administration of madarsas, arguing that it should be handled by the education department instead. The petitioner and their lawyer argued that the Madarsa Act contravenes the constitutional principle of secularism, neglects to provide necessary educational standards up to Class VIII for 14-year-olds as required by Article 21-A, and fails to deliver high-quality universal schooling to madarsa students. They asserted that “it violates the Fundamental Rights of madrasa pupils.”
In response to the petitioners, the state government lawyer argued that while religious education and instruction are being provided by the Madarsa Board, the state has the constitutional authority to authorize such instruction. The lawyer further stated that religious education is not prohibited or illegal, and that a separate board with members of a specific faith is essential for such instruction.
Uttar Pradesh has approximately 25,000 madrassas, 16,500 of which are recognized by the state’s Madrassa Education Board. Among these recognized madrassas, 560 receive government grants. An additional 8,500 unrecognized madrassas operate in the state. In response to a recent High Court decision, the Madrassa Education Board Chairman, Javed, expressed concern that their lawyer may have failed to adequately represent their case. Javed emphasized that the court’s decision will significantly impact government-aided madrassas. He cautioned that repealing the Madrasa Education Act could result in unemployment for teachers in these madrassas.
In 2004, the government established the Madarsa Education Act to promote Arabic and Persian languages. Similarly, the Sanskrit Education Council was created to support Sanskrit education. Regarding the possibility of challenging the High Court’s decision in the Supreme Court, Javed stated that the government holds the authority to make this decision, as the court has issued directives to it. AIMPLB member Farangi Mahali expressed the view that the Allahabad High Court’s order should be appealed in the Supreme Court.
The Muslim community has set up madrassas (religious schools) within their constitutional rights, similar to the existence of Sanskrit schools. Madrassas now offer modern education as well. The Madrassa Education Act aims to regulate these schools, and if abolished, hundreds of teachers in the state would lose their jobs, impacting the children’s education. This situation is concerning, and the order should be contested in the Supreme Court.
