In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court underscored that states are entitled to introduce regulatory standards intending to provide minority educational institutions with well-qualified teachers. The aim is to cultivate excellence in education. Although minority establishments have the fundamental prerogative under Article 30 of the Constitution to manage their institutions as per their preference, they do not stand exempt from these state regulations.
Key Points from the Judgment
The court introduced the paradigm that the regulatory law must strike a balance. It should ensure both the preservation of the minorities’ rights to establish and operate their educational institutions and maintain a standard of excellence.
Education was categorized broadly into two types:
1. Secular education.
2. Education focused on preserving and protecting the heritage, culture, script, and traits unique to a religious or linguistic minority.
In the case of minority-centric education, the court proposed “maximum latitude” should be allowed when hiring teachers who summarize their unique characteristics. On the other hand, secular institutions of minority should focus on recruiting the best possible teachers.
Background: The West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission Act of 2008
The judgment followed a challenge to the legitimacy of the West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission Act of 2008. This act made it mandatory for a commission to handle the teacher recruitment process in aided madrasahs, and the decisions made by this body would be binding. The SC upheld the validity of the Act and declared that the commission comprises people with deep knowledge in Islamic Culture and Theology. Furthermore, it asserted that the Act did not violate any rights of minority institutions.
| Fact | Details |
|---|---|
| The West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission Act of 2008 | Legislation making appointment of teachers in aided madrasahs the responsibility of a commission. |
| Secular education in minority institutions | Focused on providing the highest quality education using the best-potential teachers. |
| Minority-centric education | Educational establishments should have the maximum freedom to hire teachers who believe in preserving and propagating their unique traits. |
Legal References and Article 30
In its ruling, the SC referred to the TMA Pai Foundation case, 2002. It noted that the Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice (Article 30(1)) is neither absolute nor above the law. It emphasized that regulations framed in the national interest should apply to all institutions, irrespective of whether they are managed by majority or minority, as the crux of Article 30(1) is to ensure equal treatment between the two.
The court also clarified that a regulatory regime striving for excellence cannot be considered discriminatory if it imposes conditions on teacher selection or other aspects of institution functioning. Article 30 provides minorities, irrespective of religion or language, with the right to develop and manage their educational institutions. Any law related to compulsory acquisition of an educational institution’s property must not infringe upon this right. In addition, the state must avoid discriminating against any institution when granting aid, regardless of management by a minority based on religion or language.
