The Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board Act, 2004 in the case of Anjum Qadri vs Union of India and others. In this decision, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Allahabad High Court in which the Madrasa Act was declared unconstitutional in March 2024. The High Court held it to be violative of the principle of secularism and Articles 14, 21, 21-A and contrary to Section 22 of the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, 1956.
Highlights of the decision
- Reversal of the High Court order: The Supreme Court clarified that the basis for repealing a law can be only if it violates the fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution, and not just the basic structure of the Constitution.
- Justification of the Madrasa Act: The court accepted the justification of the Madrasa Act. The Act aims to regulate the standards of education in madrasas so that students reach a level of competence and can participate effectively in society.
- Legislative competence: The Supreme Court held that the Madrasa Act falls within the legislative competence of the state legislature as it relates to Entry 25 of the Concurrent List (which covers education, technical education, medical education and universities).
- Partially unconstitutional: The court held certain provisions of the Madrasa Act regulating higher education degrees such as ‘Fazil’ (postgraduate degree) and ‘Kamil’ (postgraduate degree) as partially unconstitutional as these are contrary to Section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956, which allows only institutions defined by the UGC to confer degrees.
Regulation of minority educational institutions
- Articles 29 and 30: These articles protect the cultural and educational rights of minorities. Article 30(1) provides the right to religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer their own educational institutions.
- National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI): This quasi-judicial body, set up under the NCMEI Act, 2004, works to protect the rights of minority educational institutions. It has judicial, advisory and recommendatory powers and can exercise the powers of a civil court.
- The judgment upheld the Madrasa Education Board Act as constitutionally valid, striking a balance between the state’s educational obligations and the rights of minorities.