- High Court decision overturned
- The highest court dealt a heavy blow to CM Yogi
4 p.m. News Network
New Delhi. The Supreme Court has dealt a blow to the dream of the UP government. Actually, whether the UP Madarsa Act is valid or illegal, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 5) delivered an important verdict on this matter. The Supreme Court set aside the decision of the Allahabad High Court and recognized the UP Madarsa Act. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the UP Madrasa Act. On March 22, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court ordered admission of all students in general schools, terming the UP Madarsa Board Act as contrary to the fundamental structure of the Constitution. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by CJI DY Chandrachud said this was not correct. The Supreme Court said that the state government can make laws to regularize education. This includes many aspects such as the curriculum and the health of the students. The Supreme Court said that madrassas also provide religious education, but their main objective is education.
“The government cannot take over all private property”
The Supreme Court has made an important decision in a dispute over private property. Delivering the verdict in this case, CJI DY Chandrachud said that all private property is not material resources of the community. Some private property can be material resources of the community, this is the decision of the 9-judge Constitutional Chamber, which has overturned many decisions of the Supreme Court since 1978. In the Supreme Court, a nine-judge court headed by the president of the Supreme Court DY Chandrachud has given his verdict on this decades-old dispute. A nine-judge constitutional bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud had reserved its verdict in the private property case after hearing it on May 1 this year. Delivering the verdict in the case, CJI DY Chandrachud said that there are three judgments, that of myself and six judges, that of Justice Nagarathna partially concurring and that of Justice Dhulia dissenting. We believe that to what extent Article 31C was upheld in the Kesavananda Bharti case. It was, it remains intact. The Supreme Court has made clear in its landmark decision that the government cannot acquire all private property.
this was the case
The Madrasas Act was enacted in Uttar Pradesh in 2004. It says all madrasas will be subject to government rules. There are 24,500 madrassas in UP, of which eight thousand are unregistered. The remaining 16,500 madrassas are registered and managed according to government norms. There are 560 madrasas functioning with funds from the state government.
The board can make arrangements with the consent of the government.
The Supreme Court said that the Board can create such a system with the consent of the government, wherein it can provide secular education without affecting the religious character of the madrasa. On April 5, the Supreme Court, while hearing the UP Madrasa Act, gave. an interim stay of the High Court order. The Supreme Court had reserved its decision on this matter on October 22.
Decisions after 1978 will be affected
CJI DY Chandrachud set aside post-1978 judgments that had adopted a socialist theme and held that the government can take over all private property for the common good. The CJI, in a majority judgment of seven judges, said that all private properties are not physical resources and therefore cannot be taken over by governments.
17 lakh students would be affected by High Court decision
The Supreme Court said that this would have affected 17 lakh students, we believe that the direction of transferring students to other schools was not appropriate. Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, said the state government defended the law but accepted the High Court judgment striking it down. Natraj said since the state has accepted the decision, it cannot now be burdened with the expenses of the law. The State can also repeal the law. If the matter needs to be considered, I will not obstruct it. He said the government will not close any madrassa. Nataraj said the Uttar Pradesh government bears a financial burden of Rs 1,096 crore every year to support madrassas. On March 22, the apex court declared the Uttar Pradesh Madrassa Education Board Act, 2004 unconstitutional and violative of the principle of secularism and asked the state government to accommodate the students in the formal school education system. The top court had declared the law void following a writ petition filed by lawyer Anshuman Singh Rathore.
This is the argument of the madrasas
Madrassas have been functioning since 1908. There are 16,500 madrassas in UP. 17 lakh students are studying in these. There are 10,000 teachers in madrasas. If madrassas are closed, how will they provide religious education? Madrassas operate under the orders of the government.
Madrassas do not have the right to give titles.
Regarding the UP Madarsa Act, the Supreme Court said that in the Madarsa Act, the Madarsa Board has been given the right to grant titles like Fazil, Kamil, this is against the UGC Act, it should be removed. The Supreme Court said granting a title is unconstitutional, rest of the law is constitutional, the bench of CJI Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra took this decision.
