Supreme Court Issues Contempt Notice To Education Secretary Over Religious Institutions Regulation

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on a contempt petition against Union Education Secretary TK Anil Kumar over alleged non-compliance with an earlier direction to consider a representation seeking regulation of institutions imparting religious education to children below 14 years of age.

The petition was filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who alleged that the Education Secretary had failed to take a decision on his representation despite an earlier direction from the Supreme Court.

A Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu dispensed with the personal appearance of the Education Secretary and directed that the matter be listed after four weeks.

Plea Seeks Registration, Monitoring Of Institutions

Upadhyay's representation seeks registration and monitoring of institutions providing secular or religious education to children below the age of 14.

According to the contempt petition, the Union Education Secretary did not take a decision on the representation despite the Supreme Court's earlier direction to consider it.

Upadhyay subsequently approached the court with the contempt petition alleging non-compliance.

Petitioner Raises National Security Concerns

Upadhyay has alleged that thousands of unregistered institutions are radicalising young children under the guise of imparting religious instruction because they are not supervised by the State.

The petitioner has claimed that such institutions could have serious implications for internal security as well as fraternity, unity and national integration. He has also alleged that young children could be brainwashed in the name of religion.

These claims are allegations made by the petitioner and have not been adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court in the proceedings described.

Plea Raises Questions Over Article 30

Upadhyay has also sought a direction that semi-religious minority and non-minority educational institutions cannot claim protection under Article 30 of the Constitution.

According to his plea, Article 30 is a specific reiteration of Article 19(1)(g) and does not confer additional rights.

The petitioner has contended that the expression "educational institutions of their choice" under Article 30(a) refers to "secular/professional educational institutions of their choice" and not religious educational institutions.

He has further argued that institutions imparting religious instruction to promote any "religion" are covered under Article 26(a).

Also Watch:

Matter To Be Heard After Four Weeks

Upadhyay moved the contempt petition after claiming that his representation had not been considered in accordance with the court's earlier direction.

The Supreme Court has issued notice in the matter while dispensing with the Education Secretary's personal appearance. The case will be listed again after four weeks.