India Tomorrow
NEW DELHI: The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has submitted written arguments to the Supreme Court, raising concerns about the quality of education provided by Madrasas. This submission is part of the ongoing case challenging the Allahabad High Court’s decision to overturn the ‘Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004.’
In April, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s ruling, suggesting that the High Court may have misunderstood the Act. The decision affects nearly 1.7 million students. The NCPCR’s submission highlights that Madrasas, being exempt from the Right to Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), deprive children of formal schooling benefits, including midday meals, uniforms, and trained teachers.
The NCPCR categorizes Madrasas into three types:
1. Recognized Madrasas: These provide religious education and may offer some formal education, but not in compliance with the RTE Act. They are recognized by the State Madrasa Board and have a UDISE (Unified District Information System for Education) code.
2. Unrecognized Madrasas: These have not been recognized by the State Government due to issues like inadequate formal education or non-compliant infrastructure.
3. Unmapped Madrasas: These have never applied for state recognition. According to the NCPCR, unmapped Madrasas are the most common and enroll the largest number of children.
The NCPCR argues that children attending unrecognized and unmapped Madrasas are effectively “out of school,” despite receiving regular education. Concerns include:
1. Lack of a holistic educational environment, including social events and extracurricular activities.
2. Predominantly religious teachings with minimal integration into the national education system.
3. Teachers appointed by Madrasa management do not meet RTE Act standards for qualifications and training.
4. Absence of basic amenities and formal education structures required by the RTE Act.
The NCPCR contends that Madrasas operate in a manner inconsistent with Constitutional mandates, the RTE Act, and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. They argue that Madrasas, by not adhering to RTE Act provisions, fail to provide a standardized curriculum and proper educational environment.
Specifically, the RTE Act defines a school as any recognized institution providing elementary education, which Madrasas do not meet. This lack of adherence deprives children of benefits outlined in Sections 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act, such as School Management Committees and regular monitoring of educational quality.
Additionally, the UP Board of Madrasa Education Act and similar state laws lack provisions for teacher qualifications and educational standards set by the RTE Act. This gap results in inadequate teacher training and educational resources, limiting children’s development and future career opportunities.
