The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the constitutionality of the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, overturning an earlier Allahabad High Court ruling that had deemed the Act “unconstitutional” and a breach of secular principles. This significant verdict provides relief to approximately 17 lakh students enrolled in 16,000 madarsas across Uttar Pradesh, who would have faced displacement had the Act been struck down.
The Supreme Court clarified that while the Act itself is constitutional, provisions granting higher education degrees under fazil and kamil (advanced Islamic studies) are not valid as they conflict with the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act. The decision preserves the Act’s foundational purpose—regulating madarsa education in Uttar Pradesh—while limiting its authority in awarding degrees typically under the purview of the UGC.
Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangi, Eidgah Imam and member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, welcomed the decision, stating, “This decision has brought joy to those connected with madarsas. The UP Madarsa Act, drafted by the government, offers not only Islamic but also modern education. How could an Act created by the government be deemed unconstitutional?”
Previously, in March 2023, the Allahabad High Court had ruled the UP Madarsa Education Act unconstitutional, citing it as a breach of secularism and ordering the transfer of madarsa students to other schools. The Supreme Court, however, temporarily stayed the high court’s judgment in April, arguing that the Act’s primary role is regulatory and does not mandate religious instruction. The Supreme Court also criticized the high court’s directive for relocating students, emphasizing the impact such a move would have on 17 lakh students and the state’s educational infrastructure.
In response to the Act’s constitutionality, Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing petitioners, argued that the Act’s intention is to regulate madarsas, not to enforce any particular religious instruction. He emphasized the Act’s secular regulatory framework, a point supported by the Supreme Court in its ruling.
Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, along with Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, has scheduled the case for further hearing on November 5, appointing advocate Ruchira Goel as nodal counsel to organize the case documentation electronically.
The UP government, represented by Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj, clarified that it supports the Act’s regulatory aspects but will not object to its repeal should the state deem it necessary. Nataraj highlighted the financial impact on the state, noting that it allocates approximately ₹1,096 crore annually to support madarsas across Uttar Pradesh.
The original petition challenging the Act’s constitutionality was filed by Advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore, which led to the Allahabad High Court’s earlier ruling in March. The Supreme Court’s decision now safeguards the future of madarsa education in the state, enabling students to continue their education under the Act’s framework while aligning with national regulations on higher education.