NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, overturning an earlier decision by the Allahabad High Court that had declared the law unconstitutional. The High Court had based its decision on the claim that the Act violated the principle of secularism a core tenet of the Constitution’s basic structure.
However, the Supreme Court clarified that the basic structure doctrine does not permit a statute to be invalidated on the grounds of secularism alone. Instead, it held that a law can be deemed unconstitutional only if it infringes upon fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution or if it is outside the jurisdiction of the legislative authority that enacted it.
Positive obligation of the state and the limits of regulation
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, observed that the Madarsa Act aligns with the state’s responsibility to ensure that students in recognized Madarsas achieve an education level that enables them to participate in society and earn a living. This purpose, the Court noted, is in line with the state’s duty to support educational initiatives that prepare students to thrive in various societal roles. However, the Court ruled that the provisions within the Act that sought to regulate higher education specifically degrees such as ‘Fazil’ and ‘Kamil’ conflicted with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, thus rendering these provisions unconstitutional.
The conflict arises because the UGC Act, enacted under Entry 66 of List I (pertaining to the Union List in the Constitution), governs higher education standards in India, which includes degree recognition. In contrast, the Madarsa Act falls under Entry 25 of List III (Concurrent List), permitting state intervention in other educational matters. Since regulating ‘Fazil’ and ‘Kamil’ degrees encroaches upon the UGC’s mandate over higher education, the Court held these provisions to be beyond the legislative competence of the state.
Academic Levels in Madarsa Education Explained
Madarsa education in Uttar Pradesh is structured into four main levels, each corresponding to conventional school standards-
Tathania Level: This foundational level is equivalent to elementary school, covering classes I to V. At this stage, students receive basic literacy and foundational education.
Fauquania Level: Equivalent to upper elementary classes (VI to VIII), this level builds upon foundational education, introducing students to intermediate academic subjects.
Maulvi or Munshi Level: This level corresponds to secondary school, or the Xth standard, and provides students with knowledge that parallels the standard secondary school curriculum.
Alim Level: Equivalent to the XIIth standard or senior secondary level, this is the highest school-level certification offered in madarsas and represents an advanced level of education within the madarsa framework.
Beyond these, certain madarsas offer Kamil and Fazil degrees. While these degrees are higher-level certifications, the Uttar Pradesh state has clarified that they are not recognized as equivalents to conventional graduate and postgraduate degrees. This distinction was significant in the Supreme Court’s ruling, as the degrees do not align with the standards of university education regulated by the UGC Act.
Apex court calls for separation of higher education provisions from the Madarsa Act
The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court’s assessment that the entire Madarsa Act was unconstitutional. The bench clarified that only those parts of the Act that pertain to higher education (i.e., ‘Fazil’ and ‘Kamil’ degrees) were in conflict with the UGC Act. These sections, it argued, could be separated from the rest of the Act, allowing the remaining provisions to continue in force.
According to the Court, the primary objective of the Madarsa Act is to facilitate the functioning and enhancement of madarsa education in Uttar Pradesh by establishing appropriate standards and resources for students in these institutions. The Act’s purpose is not confined solely to regulating ‘Fazil’ and ‘Kamil’ degrees. Therefore, the Act would have been passed even without the higher education provisions, meaning they can be severed without impacting the entire Act’s validity.
As the Court pointed out, while the Board of Madarsa Education does prescribe curriculum and conduct exams, its responsibilities are broader and do not hinge solely on managing ‘Fazil’ and ‘Kamil’ degrees.
