Madrassas arenot immune to state’s reasonable regulations: HC | Lucknow News
Prayagraj: Holding that the minority educational institutions like madrassas are not immune from reasonable regulations of state for ensuring academic standards, the Allahabad high court quashed the advertisement issued by a minority institution for recruitment of assistant teachers without adhering to state’s guidelines, reports Rajesh Kumar Pandey.“The Constitution of India undoubtedly guarantees to minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice; however, this right cannot be stretched to claim immunity from reasonable regulations framed to ensure academic excellence and maintain standards of education,” the court added.While allowing the writ petition filed by Committee of Management Madarssa Arabia Shamshul Uloom Sikariganj Ehata Nawab and another, the court held that right of minorities under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India must be exercised within reasonable regulations and frameworks of the state government for ensuring academic excellence and maintaining standards of education.The court observed, “…Thus, the issuance of advertisement without waiting for the government to frame the standards for qualification of teachers in the madarsa is bad in the eyes of law and in violation of the aforesaid article.”With these observations, Justice Manju Rani Chauhan quashed the advertisement issued by Nazime of Ala/Manager of Madarssa Arabia Shamshul Uloom Sikariganj (Ehata Nawab), Gorakhpur, for appointment of assistant teachers and a clerk, which was issued without any guidelines from the government.According to the petitioner, the government order (GO) regarding directions for selection of teachers in madrasa was issued on May 20, 2025 and the advertisement, for appointment on various posts, under challenge was issued on April 29, 2025. It was pleaded that despite representations, the selection process was not stopped and was continued in terms of the advertisement rather than following the GO.Holding that right under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India was subject to the reasonableness, the court held that the manager had acted in contravention of the order of the Supreme Court and government policy and quashed the advertisement.The court in its judgment dated October 17 held that if any appointments were made in pursuance of the advertisement, they were per se illegal and such appointees did not have a right to raise objections or be heard.
