The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Secretary of the Ministry of Education over a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with its earlier direction on a plea seeking regulation of institutions providing education or religious instruction to children below the age of 14.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu issued notice to T K Anil Kumar, Secretary, Ministry of Education, and asked him to file his response within four weeks.
The court was hearing a contempt petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. He alleged that the Education Secretary had failed to take action on a representation submitted by him following an earlier Supreme Court order.
On May 11, the Supreme Court had directed Upadhyay to approach the Union government with his concerns and submit a representation.
The original plea seeks measures to register, recognise, supervise and monitor all institutions that provide secular education or religious instruction to children up to the age of 14. The petitioner has referred to Articles 21A, 39, 45 and 51-A of the Constitution while seeking greater oversight of such institutions.
The petition also raises questions about Article 30 and its relationship with Article 19. Upadhyay has argued that Article 30 should not be interpreted as providing minorities with additional rights, benefits or privileges beyond those guaranteed under Article 19.
The plea has also highlighted concerns regarding the functioning of unregistered and unrecognised educational or religious institutions. According to the petitioner, children below the age of 14 are particularly vulnerable because of their young age, and the state has a responsibility to ensure that they receive education in a safe and regulated environment.
The petitioner has described the issue as one of national importance. He has expressed concern that children could potentially be manipulated or influenced in institutions operating without proper registration or government oversight.
Upadhyay claimed that he had visited several districts along the Uttar Pradesh border and found numerous institutions that were allegedly operating without registration or recognition. He further alleged that such institutions were increasing in border areas without an effective regulatory mechanism.
The petition was filed through advocate Ashwani Dubey.
The Supreme Court’s latest order does not decide the substantive issues raised in the petition. Instead, the notice seeks the government’s response to the allegations that its earlier direction was not properly acted upon.
The Education Ministry will now have four weeks to respond to the court. The matter is expected to come up for further consideration after the government files its reply.
The proceedings could have wider implications for the regulation and oversight of institutions catering to children below the age of 14, particularly those operating outside the formal education system. Any decision on the broader demands, however, will depend on the government’s response and subsequent orders of the Supreme Court.
Reader Comments 0