Assam: SC Issues Notice to State Govt on Plea Against HC Verdict on State-Funded Madrassas

GUWAHATI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notices to respondents, including the Assam Government on the plea against the Gauhati High Court verdict that state- funded Madrassas being government schools cannot impart religious instruction.

The appeal challenges the decision that had in effect turned existing provincialized madrassas in Assam into regular government schools.

A bench of SC justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar passed the order on the petition moved by a total of 13 persons through advocate-on-record Adeel Ahmed. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, advocates Adeel Ahmed and Abdur Razzaque Bhuyan argued in the matter for the petitioners. Senior Advocate Hegde, representing the petitioners, argued before the bench that the high Court decision was erroneous as it had equated provincialization with nationalization.

The petition filed by the advocated challenged the judgment passed by the Gauhati High Court dated February 4, 2022, that upheld the validity of the Assam Madrassa Education (Provincialization) Act, 1995 (repealed by the Act of 2020) and all corresponding government orders including the February 12 2021 Notification.

The high court observed that the Madrassas being government schools, wholly maintained by the State after provincialisation, are covered by Article 28(1) of the Constitution and as such are barred from imparting religious instruction.

The petitioners, including Imad Uddin Barbhuiya, argued that High Court has erroneously observed that the petitioner Madrassas being government schools through provincialisation, cannot be permitted to impart religious instruction.

The petition states that the Assam Madrassa Education (Provincialization) Act, 1995 (repealed by the Act of 2020) is only limited to the State undertaking to pay the salaries and provide consequential benefits to the teaching and non-teaching staff employed in Madrassas along with the administration, management and control of these Madrassas.

The petition also stated that the land and building belonging to the madrassas are maintained by the petitioners and the petitioner Madrassas themselves bear the expenditures on electricity and furniture.

"The repealing Act of 2020 takes away property coupled with statutory recognition of Madrassa education and the impugned order dated 12.02.2021 issued by the Governor disbands the 'Assam State Madrasa Board' created in 1954. It amounts to an arbitrary exercise of both legislative and executive powers and amounts to a denial of the Petitioner Madrassas' ability to continue as madrassas providing religious instruction coupled with religious education," the petition stated.

The petitioner submitted before the SC that such encroachment by the state into the proprietary rights of the petitioner Madrassas, without paying adequate compensation, is a direct infraction of Article 30(1A) of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner pointed out that the operation of the impugned judgment would result in the discontinuation of the Petitioner Madrassas as Madrassas and would prevent them from admitting students for the old courses for this academic year.

As such, the plea in the apex court, filed by Md. Imad Uddin Barbhuiya and 12 other residents of Assam, sought a stay on the operation of the Gauhati High Court's order as an interim relief.

Also read: Meghalaya HC: Cannot Apply POCSO Act To Mutual Act Of Love Between Young Couple

Also watch: