Madrassas 'unsuitable' place for children to receive proper education: NCPCR to SC
- In Reports
- 11:13 PM, Sep 12, 2024
- Myind Staff
The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has informed the Supreme Court that madrassas are "unsuitable" for providing children with "proper education." The NCPCR argued that the education offered in madrassas is "not comprehensive" and contravenes the provisions of the Right to Education Act.
The child rights body informed the Supreme Court that children not enrolled in the formal schooling system are being deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including entitlements like midday meals, uniforms, and other benefits.
The NCPCR said that madrassas including a few NCERT books in their curriculum is a "mere guise" and does not guarantee that children are receiving formal or quality education.
"A madrassa is not only an unsuitable/unfit place to receive 'proper' education but also in the absence of entitlements as provided under Sections 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act," it said.
"Further, madrassas do not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient model for education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardised curriculum and functioning," the NCPCR said in its written submissions filed before the top court.
The child rights body stated that in the absence of the provisions of the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, madrassas are also deprived of entitlements outlined in Section 21 of the Act.
"A madrassa works in an arbitrary manner and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school.
"A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A madrassa being out of this definition has no right to compel children or their families to receive madrassa education," the NCPCR said.
The NCPCR pointed out that most madrassas fail to provide a holistic environment for students, lacking in areas such as organising social events or extracurricular activities for experiential learning.
In a reprieve for around 17 lakh madrassa students, the Supreme Court stayed an Allahabad High Court order on 5 April, which had declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and in violation of the principle of secularism.
A three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, noted that the issues raised required further consideration and issued notices to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh Government, and others in response to petitions challenging the high court's ruling. The Supreme Court observed that the high court had "prima facie" misinterpreted the Act's provisions, which do not include any religious instruction.
On 22 March, the Allahabad High Court declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and in violation of the principle of secularism. The court directed the state government to integrate madrassa students into the formal schooling system.
The high court's ruling was based on a writ petition filed by advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore, which led to the declaration of the law as ultra vires.
It had said the state has "no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it."
"We hold that the Madarsa Act, 2004, is violative of the principle of secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the high court had said.
The petitioner challenged the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Madarsa Board and also objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department rather than the Education Department.
Image source: X
Comments