NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on a contempt petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay against Union Education Secretary T.K. Anil Kumar, alleging non-compliance with an earlier direction to consider his representation seeking regulation and monitoring of institutions imparting religious education to children below the age of 14 years.
A Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu also dispensed with the personal appearance of the Education Secretary and directed that the matter be listed after four weeks.
Contempt petition arises from Upadhyay’s representation seeking registration and monitoring of institutions providing secular as well as religious education to children below 14 years of age. According to the plea, despite the Supreme Court’s earlier directions, the representation has not been considered or decided by the Union Education Secretary.
Upadhyay has alleged that thousands of unregistered institutions are imparting religious instruction to young children without adequate State supervision. He has claimed that such institutions could potentially be used to “radicalise gullible young children” under the guise of religious education.
The plea contends that the issue has implications not only for internal security but also for fraternity, unity and national integration, as young children could allegedly be subjected to religious indoctrination and brainwashing.
Upadhyay has also sought clarification on the scope of Article 30 of the Constitution, contending that semi-religious minority and non-minority educational institutions cannot claim protection under the provision merely on the basis of their religious character.
According to the plea, Article 30 is a specific reiteration of the right under Article 19(1)(g) and does not confer any additional rights. It further argues that the expression “educational institutions of their choice” under Article 30(1) should mean secular or professional educational institutions and not institutions primarily imparting religious education.
The petitioner has further contended that institutions imparting religious instruction for promoting any particular religion would fall within the ambit of Article 26(a) of the Constitution.
Alleging that his representation has remained undecided despite the Court’s earlier directions, Upadhyay has now moved the contempt petition seeking action for alleged non-compliance. The Supreme Court has directed the matter to be listed after four weeks.
We are a multimedia news network. Website : www.7xnews.com Based in New Delhi (India)
Youtube : umakantlakheraspeaks@gmail.com
