The Uttarakhand High Court has stepped into a significant legal debate concerning minority education rights. On Wednesday, the court issued a formal notice to the state government regarding a writ petition that challenges crucial provisions of the recently enacted Uttarakhand Minority Education Act, 2025. The court has directed the government to file its response within a strict period of two weeks.
Petition Challenges Constitutional Validity
The legal challenge was mounted by the KBN Educational & Social Welfare Society, which operates a madrassa in the Udham Singh Nagar district. The society filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, questioning the validity of specific sections of the new law. The petition targets Sections 4, 13, 14, 15, and 16 of the 2025 Act, arguing they are constitutionally unsound.
Representing the petitioner, its secretary Nizam Uddeen, contended that these disputed provisions infringe upon fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. The plea specifically cites violations of Articles 14, 19, 21, 21A, 25, 29, and 30. These articles collectively safeguard essential freedoms, including equality before the law, freedom of religion, the right to education, and the critical rights of minorities to establish and administer their own educational institutions.
Madrassa's Established Credentials and Autonomy at Stake
The petition provides a detailed history of the institution to bolster its case. The madrassa was established in 2005 and has received recognition at various stages from competent authorities. This includes recognition from the Uttarakhand Madrasa Education Board and the state's ministry of education.
The society claims it secured permanent recognition for secondary and senior secondary levels. Furthermore, it obtained equivalence certificates from the Uttarakhand Board of School Education and was granted the official status of a minority educational institution in 2018. The institution also asserts that its infrastructure fully complies with all applicable regulations.
A key argument presented is that previous government orders allowed students from madrassas affiliated with the Uttarakhand Madrasa Education Board to seek admission in mainstream schools. This, the petitioner argues, highlights the existing integration and recognition framework that the new Act disrupts.
Legal Arguments and Sought Relief
The petitioner's counsel, Kartikey Hari Gupta, articulated the core grievance. He stated that despite the madrassa fulfilling all statutory requirements under previous laws, the 2025 Act imposes new provisions that adversely affect the functioning and autonomy of institutions run by minorities. The Act is seen as introducing hurdles that were not present before.
In seeking relief, the society has requested the High Court to:
- Declare the challenged provisions as ultra vires (beyond the powers) of the Constitution.
- Issue directions to restrain the authorities from implementing these specific sections.
- Grant any other relief the court deems fit in the interest of justice.
Following a preliminary hearing, the bench issued notices not only to the state government but also to the Uttarakhand Madrasa Education Board and the Uttarakhand Board of School Education. All three entities have been directed to submit their counter-affidavits within the same two-week timeframe. The court's upcoming decision will be closely watched as it touches upon the sensitive balance between state regulation and the constitutional protections granted to minority educational institutions.
