SC: Govt can regulate selection of students in minority institutes
‘Art 30 Is Not An Absolute Right’
AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com
New Delhi:07.01.2020
In a ruling with significant implications for minority institutions, the Supreme Court on Monday held that Article 30(1) does not confer an absolute right to them to run their affairs as per their choice as they need to regard merit while selecting students and teachers.
The SC said government has a role in ensuring quality of education in a case regarding a West Bengal law setting up a commission for appointing teachers to madarsas which receive government funding. The law was struck down by the high court but the decision has now been reversed by the SC. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and U U Lalit said any such regulative measures is not only in the interest of the minority educational institution, but of the public and nation as a whole. Such measures must necessarily apply to all educational institutions, whether run by majority or minority communities, even as it added that government regulations cannot destroy the minority character of an institution.
9-judge SC bench to hear Sabari case
A nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court will hear from January 13, the issue of allowing women and girls of all ages to enter Kerala’s Sabarimala temple along with other contentious issues of alleged discrimination against Muslim and Parsi women. Last November, a five-judge bench in a 3:2 verdict had referred to a 7-judge bench, the pleas seeking review of its 2018 ruling allowing women and girls of all ages to enter Sabarimala temple. P10
Merit must be the governing criterion: SC
The bench said, “The decision in TMA Pai Foundation case, rendered by eleven judges of this court, put the matter beyond any doubt and clarified that the right under Article 30(1) is not absolute or above the law and that conditions concerning the welfare of the students and teachers must apply in order to provide proper academic atmosphere, so long as they did not interfere with the right of the administration or management.” Article 30 says that all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
The question of procedures and appointments has arisen frequently in the context of the state’s role when it aids such institutions.
Referring to another verdict of the apex court, Justice Lalit, who penned the judgment, said merit-based selection is in the interest of the nation and this strengthens national welfare and must not be ignored.
“Selection of meritorious students has been accepted to be in national interest. A minority institution cannot in the name of right under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, disregard merit or merit-based selection of students as regards professional and higher education. The right to take disciplinary action against the staff has also not been accepted to be an unqualified right,” the court said.
The court said excellence and merit must be the governing criteria in national interest if the right has not been accepted as absolute and unqualified. “Any departure from the concept of merit and excellence would not make a minority educational institution an effective vehicle to achieve what has been contemplated in various decisions of this Court.
Further, if merit is not the sole and governing criteria, the minority institutions may lag behind the non-minority institutions rather than keep in step with them,” it said.
“An objection can certainly be raised if an unfavourable treatment is meted out to an educational institution established and administered by minority,” it said.
‘Art 30 Is Not An Absolute Right’
AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com
New Delhi:07.01.2020
In a ruling with significant implications for minority institutions, the Supreme Court on Monday held that Article 30(1) does not confer an absolute right to them to run their affairs as per their choice as they need to regard merit while selecting students and teachers.
The SC said government has a role in ensuring quality of education in a case regarding a West Bengal law setting up a commission for appointing teachers to madarsas which receive government funding. The law was struck down by the high court but the decision has now been reversed by the SC. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and U U Lalit said any such regulative measures is not only in the interest of the minority educational institution, but of the public and nation as a whole. Such measures must necessarily apply to all educational institutions, whether run by majority or minority communities, even as it added that government regulations cannot destroy the minority character of an institution.
9-judge SC bench to hear Sabari case
A nine-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court will hear from January 13, the issue of allowing women and girls of all ages to enter Kerala’s Sabarimala temple along with other contentious issues of alleged discrimination against Muslim and Parsi women. Last November, a five-judge bench in a 3:2 verdict had referred to a 7-judge bench, the pleas seeking review of its 2018 ruling allowing women and girls of all ages to enter Sabarimala temple. P10
Merit must be the governing criterion: SC
The bench said, “The decision in TMA Pai Foundation case, rendered by eleven judges of this court, put the matter beyond any doubt and clarified that the right under Article 30(1) is not absolute or above the law and that conditions concerning the welfare of the students and teachers must apply in order to provide proper academic atmosphere, so long as they did not interfere with the right of the administration or management.” Article 30 says that all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
The question of procedures and appointments has arisen frequently in the context of the state’s role when it aids such institutions.
Referring to another verdict of the apex court, Justice Lalit, who penned the judgment, said merit-based selection is in the interest of the nation and this strengthens national welfare and must not be ignored.
“Selection of meritorious students has been accepted to be in national interest. A minority institution cannot in the name of right under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, disregard merit or merit-based selection of students as regards professional and higher education. The right to take disciplinary action against the staff has also not been accepted to be an unqualified right,” the court said.
The court said excellence and merit must be the governing criteria in national interest if the right has not been accepted as absolute and unqualified. “Any departure from the concept of merit and excellence would not make a minority educational institution an effective vehicle to achieve what has been contemplated in various decisions of this Court.
Further, if merit is not the sole and governing criteria, the minority institutions may lag behind the non-minority institutions rather than keep in step with them,” it said.
“An objection can certainly be raised if an unfavourable treatment is meted out to an educational institution established and administered by minority,” it said.
No comments:
Post a Comment