The State Education Ministers' Conference beginning on 22 October, 1998 has some extremely serious proposals on its agenda including direct or indirect amendments in Articles 28 and 30 of the Constitution (Minorities educational rights and ban on religious instruction in schools

As early as 1958 the Supreme Court of India had asserted that "the right guaranteed under Article 30 is a right that is absolute and any law which infringes the substance of that right is void" in re Kerala Education Bill case). And very recently in 1998 the Court has emphatically held that "the legal position adumbrated in Re Kerala Education Bill remains unchanged and the protective cover of Article 30 cannot be chiseled out through any legislative act". (Emjay School's case decided on 7th September 1998).

As regards the proposal to induct Hindu religious philosophy into the school curriculum, it sets at naught Article 28 of the Constitution banning religious instruction in schools maintained or aided by the State. It is true that Justice J.S. Verma (now heading the Curriculum Revision Committee of HRD Ministry). I did observe in his Hindutva Judgement of 1996 that Hinduism was "a way of life" and not a mere religion. The observation was, however, made in the extremely limited context of an election petition alleging religious appeal on the part of some political leaders. By no dint of imagination can this observation of the learned judge be regarded as a license given by "the Supreme court of India" to adopt the school curriculum to the theology of any particular religion. It should not be forgotten that the observation had earned severe criticism from the top law-brains of the country including Nani Palkhivala, Rajender Sachar, V.M. Tarkunde and the present Attorney General Soli J. Sorabjee, most of whom had demanded its denouncement by a larger Bench of the supreme Court. In the wake of this overwhelming criticism. Justice Verma himself had to clarify in another quick judgement that those 'apprehensions and misgiving s were unfounded."

Inclusion of Articles 28 to 30 in the Constitution was a well-considered decision of the Nation's Constituent Assembly. These are, indubitably, inalienable parts of the "Basic Structure" of the Constitution which a 13-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Kesvanand Bharati's case (1973) had assertively put beyond Parliament's power to amend the Constitution. The people should not be deprived of these extremely just provisions incorporated into the Constitution by the noble souls who formulated the great National Charter.