EDUCATION
Krishan Mahajan on Minorities' Educational Rights
The meaning to be given to the fundamental right of religious and linguistic minorities to have educational institutions of their choice is now before an 11-Judge Bench of the apex court. It is a political issue on which the court is asked to deliberate. Under our Constitution, the pronouncement of the court will be legally binding on all Indians.
The vital issue will be the approach of the Judges. An approach of reading Article 30 all alone can turn religion and language into such divisive sources that there is nothing left of what the Constitution calls India or Indians. The approach of a harmonious reading of Article 30 in the scheme of the Constitution, can give a chance for the creation of an Indian brotherhood of 1000 million, based on equality of opportunity. Unfortunately, none of the Supreme Court majority judgements in Benches of five or more have adopted this universally recognised canon of construction.
The Supreme Court has erected a set of "basic structure" rights providing a common protection to all citizens. One of these is the concept of secularism. Hence Article 30 has to be interpreted, subject to the constitutional concept of secularism. Sadly, none of the Supreme Court judgements on Article 30 have done this.
This concept affords a common protection to all Indians if judicial notice is taken of the fact that in reality there is nothing like a majority community in India. Linguistically, every Indian is in a minority in another State where his language is not spoken.
Further, Hindu religion as such is not a monolithic religion which advocates either social ostracisation or violence against any non-believer. There being no majority and only minorities in India, Article 30 belongs to all Indian citizens who find themselves numerically in small numbers in a State vis-a-vis their religion or language. Given this numerical definition of minority, which makes Article 30 available to all Indians in various parts of India, no educational institution can continue to claim minority status if the preponderant numbers therein are not from the numerical minority.
This explains why Article 29 carries the note "Protection of Interests of Minorities", while giving the fundamental right to preserve language scrip and culture to "any section of citizens".
The secular concept of our Constitution makes all religions subject to the requirements of public order, health and morality.
Having defined the legal place of all religions in India, the question arises about the place of education. If all Indians are religious or linguistic minorities in one or the other part of India, then all Indians are equally subject to legal regulation of the secular activity of education which may be associated with religious practice. Well, then what is left of the fundamental right under Article 30? The answer is institutions of theology, or those for preservation of ethnic identity, research and teaching only of a particular language or culture.
This requires judicial notice of two facts. One, that the historical evolution of rational, reformative education with a scientific temper as a base for economic development has been that of divorcing it from any religion.
The right to primary education ... is a right available to all Indians,, not to any minority or majority. Modern higher education has everything to do with knowledge, leadership and nothing with anyone's religion or language. Two secular education is linked to language and jobs. In terms of the doctrine of impact, the present interpretation of Article 30 has produced an English-speaking 10 per cent that rules 90 per cent citizens who do not speak English. Ninety per cent are, therefore, denied equality of opportunity (sic).
A right of minority institutions cannot be one that annihilates the fundamental and basic right to equality and destroys nationhood by creating amongst children a feeling of "us and they". Surely an interpretation which enables politicians to make vote-banks of religion or language and combine it with corrupt finance that commercialise education should not be adopted.
Shahabuddin's Letter to The Indian Express, 25 February, 1997
Apropos Shri Krishan Mahajan's Legal Perspectives 'on Article 30, he appears to have taken a long jump in his argument from emphasising the "multiplicity" of religious and linguistic minorities and their interchange ability at various levels to the total denial of safeguards for them in the field of education and culture.
No religious and linguistic community in our country is a consistently a majority everywhere at each of the functional levels: Panchayat, Block, District, State and Union. Similarly every such community is a minority somewhere at some functional level. Therefore the logical answer is to extend the scope of Article 30 to every community which forms a minority within the catchment area of the educational institution of its choice it desires to establish. The catchment area can be defined uniformly for all grades of educational institutions from the primary school to the university.
Secondly, there is no reason to make any distinction between linguistic and religious minorities in access to the rights under Article 30.
Incidentally I had myself proposed, in the form of a Private Member's Bill submitted to the 9th Lok Sabha, that this right should be available to all religious and linguistic communities and not "minorities".
What Mr. Mahajan has apparently forgotten is the relative educational backwardness of some communities which do not even enjoy any reservation (like SC and ST) in education. Their educational backwardness will be perpetuated under a system of admission on merit in all institutions of secular education. Secondly, Shri Mahajan has also forgotten that religious and linguistic communities are also entitled to endeavour to provide an environment and sometimes even additional instruction to transmit their chosen values to the succeeding generations in order to preserve their identity. Diversity must not only be accepted but celebrated in a plural society like ours. Thirdly, why should any community be debarred from making its contribution in the field of education, at least for its own children?
Article 30 neither annihilates right to equality nor militates against far less destroys nationhood. Speaking for myself, as a member of a national religious as well as of a national linguistic minority group I would be prepared to exchange the rights under Article 30 for reservation in education, provided as in the case of primary education, the State takes up the responsibility of educating people right upto the University level.
Supreme Court on Pay-scale of Teachers in Private Aided Schools
State of Haryana and others, Appellants v. Rajpal Sharma and others, Respondents.
K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ
Constitution of India, Article 16, 39(d) - Pay scale - Teachers in privately managed aided School in State of Haryana - Are entitled to same salary and dearness allowance as is paid to teachers in Government schools.
Allahabad High Court on State Regulation of Minority Educational Institutions
Smt. J.K. Kalra, Petitioner v. Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, Meerut and others, Respondents.
U.P. SINGH, SUDHIR NARAIN & R.H. ZAIDI, JJ.
Constitution of India, Article 30(1) – Minority institutions - Regulatory measures can be taken by State in administration or said institutions.
Constitution of India, Article 30(1) - U.P. Intermediate Education Act (2 of 1921), Section 16G (3)(a) - Minority institutions - Section 16G(3)(a) providing for prior approval of District Inspector before discharging, removing or dismissing from service or reducing in rank or subjecting to any diminution in emoluments or terminating service of any teacher of recognised minority institution – Is applicable to recognised and aided minority institutions.
List of Institutions with Guidance and Consultancy Services in Data Processing Relating to Social Services
1. Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, 29, Rajpur Road, Delhi-110 054.
2.Sardar Patel Institute of Economic and Social Research, P.B. No.4062, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.
3.Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics, Pune
4. Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Sion-Trombay Road, Deonar, Bombay - 400 004.
5. Centre for Social Studies, South Gujarat University Campus, Udhna-Magdalla Road, Surat-395 007.
6.Giri Institute of Development Studies, Sector Aliganj Housing Scheme, Lucknow-226 020.
7.A.N. Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna-800001.
8.Indian Statistical Institute, Sociological Unit, 203, Barrackpore Trunk Road, Calcutta - 700 035
9. Centre for Economic and Social Studies, Nizamia Observatory Campus, Begumpet, Hyderabad (AP)
10. Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.
11. Centre for Research in Rural & Indus. Development, 2A, Sector 19A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.
12. ICSSR Data Archives, 35, Ferozeshah Road, New Delhi-110 001.
Saikia Committee on Elementary Education as a Fundamental Right – Recommendations 15 January, 1997, (Excerpts)
Proposed Amendments to the Constitution:
The Constitution of India should be amended to make the right to free elementary education upto 14 years of age, a Fundamental Right. Simultaneously, an explicit provision should be made in the Constitution to make it the Fundamental Duty of every citizen who is a parent to provide opportunities for elementary education to all children up to 14 years of age.
Statutory Measures:
States should either amend their existing legislations or enact fresh legislations to give effect to the proposed Constitutional amendments. Fresh State legislation should provide inter-alia for the following:
(d) Establishment of primary schools within a distance of 1 - 1.5 km. from rural habitations provided that there is a population of 250 in the catchment areas;
(e) Establishment of upper primary schools within a distance of 3 Km. from rural habitations provided that there is a population of 500 in the catchment areas;
State Governments should be entitled to relax the norms suitably in (d) and (e) above in the case of hill, desert, tribal areas and inaccessible areas to as to ensure that the proposed schools are viable. Howevem in no case should existing State norms be diluted.
Free Education
A State-wise approach in regard to free education should be adopted in keeping with the local requirements and constraints. In order to ensure uniformity, free elementary education should mean exemption from tuition fee; provision of free textbooks for all primary school children and girls upto upper primary level and provision of essential stationery to all children in primary classes. In addition, the Mid-day Meals Programme may be continued.
State Governments may provide other incentives as free school uniforms, cash incentives, such scholarships, etc. in accordance with their economic capacity and priorities.
Medium of Instruction
In regard to medium of instructions at primary level, States should continue the existing policy of providing primary education in the regional language and where regional language is other than the mother tongue, in mother tongue. Article 350(A) of the Constitution which stipulates that adequate facilities should be provided for provision of primary education in mother tongue to linguistic minorities, should be followed in letter and spirit.
