Case on religious instruction in Madrasas will affect rights of children: Allahabad High Court allows NCPCR to intervene

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday allowed National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) to intervene in a case dealing with whether religious education can be imparted in government-funded Madrasas. [Azaj Ahamad v. Union of India & Ors].In March this year, the High Court had sought replies from the Central and State governments on the issue. It was hearing a plea by one Azaj Ahamad, working as a teacher in a Madrasa in Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh, who sought relief regarding a salary issue.On Wednesday, Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh appointed Advocate SM Singh Raikwar as amicus curiae to assist the Court in the matter and noted,"The matter is of wide ramification and some importance and outcome of this case will effect the education system as well as the rights of the children studying in Madrasas.".The NCPCR in its intervention plea has stated that the education given to children in Madrasas is not adequate or comprehensive.It claimed that there have been numerous complaints that Madrasas work in an “arbitrary manner” and this is against the provisions of Right to Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) and Juvenile Justice Act.The Commission also mentioned that the matter at hand required keen consideration and hence it sought permission to assist the court..Previously, the Court had noted that it was not a disputed fact that in Madrasas, besides normal curriculum, religious education is also imparted.Thereby, it had sought replies from the Union and State governments on the following, within six weeks:How on Government expense or the funding provided by the Government Exchequer religious education be imparted and;Whether this could be in violation of Articles 14, 25, 26, 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India.The matter will be heard next on May 30..Advocate Adil Hussain represented the petitioner, while Advocates Rakshit Raj Singh and Swarupama Chaturvedi represented NCPCR. Advocate Rakesh Tewari appeared for the Central government, while Advocate Sandeep Sharma represented the State government..[Read Order]