Mangaluru Chalo: Cops scuttle bike rally as BJP defies ban

New Delhi, Sep 12: Madrasas are "unsuitable" places for children to receive "proper education" and the education imparted there is "not comprehensive" and is against the provisions of the Right to Education Act, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has told the Supreme Court.

The child rights body told the top court that children, who are not in formal schooling system, are deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including entitlements such as midday meal, uniform etc.

The NCPCR said madrassas merely teaching from a few NCERT books in the curriculum is a "mere guise" in the name of imparting education and does not ensure that the children are receiving formal and quality education.

"A madrassa is not only a unsuitable/unfit place to receive 'proper' education but also in absence of entitlements as provided under Sections 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act," it said.

"Further, madrasas do not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient model for education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardised curriculum and functioning," the NCPCR said in its written submissions filed before the top court.

The child rights body stated that due to the absence of provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, the madrassas are also deprived of entitlement as in Section 21 of the Act of 2009.

"A madrassa works in an arbitrary manner and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school.

"A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A madrassa being out of this definition has no right to compel children or their families to receive madrassa education," the NCPCR said.

It said most of the madrassas fail to provide a holistic environment to students, including planning social events, or extracurricular activities for 'experiential learning.

In a breather to about 17 lakh madrassa students, the apex court on April 5 had stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court that scrapped the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 calling it "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism.

Observing that the issues raised in the petitions merit closer reflection, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had issued notices to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh government and others on the pleas against the high court order.

The top court said had the high court "prima facie" misconstrued the provisions of the Act, which does not provide for any religious instruction.

The high court had on March 22 declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism, and asked the state government to accommodate students in the formal schooling system.

The high court had declared the law ultra vires on a writ petition filed by advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore.

It had said the state has "no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it."

"We hold that the Madarsa Act, 2004, is violative of the principle of secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the high court had said.

The petitioner had challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Board as well as objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department instead of the education department.

Kalaburagi: Karnataka Home Minister G Parameshwara on Tuesday said that alleged role of "outsiders" belonging to the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) in the violence at Nagamangala will be examined and action taken based on the probe report.

Clashes broke out between two groups during a Ganesh idol procession in the town in Mandya district following which mobs went on a rampage targeting several shops and vehicles leading to tension on September 11 night.

"Everything will be examined, investigation will be done, on getting the report we will decide. We will not protect anyone, and unnecessarily no one will be punished. We will look into the facts based on the inquiry report and take action accordingly," Parameshwara told reporters here.

He noted that two officials -- Deputy Superintendent of Police and Inspector -- have already been suspended, and added that further action will be taken based on the report.

The Minister said the government has taken the Nagamangala violence seriously and there is no question of taking such incidents lightly. "BJP makes such allegations, but we too have responsibility, we don't take anything lightly."

On allegations that "outsiders" were involved in the violence, Parameshwara said if inquiry reveals complicity of such elements, it would be examined and action taken accordingly.

Regarding claims that those belonging to the banned PFI were involved, he said: "It will be known from the probe."

On demand for a National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe into Nagamangala violence by BJP which alleged "failure" of state's home department, Parameshwara said: "they keep saying such things, we will not listen to all that."

According to police, an argument had broken out between two groups, when the procession by devotees from Badri Koppalu village reached a place of worship on September 11, and some miscreants hurled stones, which escalated the situation.

Following the clashes between the two groups, a few shops were vandalised and goods torched and vehicles set on fire, they added.

To allegations from some BJP leaders that the party MLA Munirathna was arrested "hurriedly", Parameshwara said, police acted after the complaint was given, "what's wrong in that?"

Munirathna, who represents Rajarajeshwari Nagar Assembly segment here, was picked up from Nangli village in Kolar’s Mulbagal on Saturday evening on charges of harassing a Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) contractor for bribe, casteist slurs on a former corporator, and also cheating, criminal intimidation and insulting a woman’s modesty.

Asked about "illegal items" seized from the prison here recently by officials, he said an investigation has begun on this.

When a photo of actor Darshan Thoogudeepa, who was lodged in Parappana Agrahara Prison here, hanging out with other inmates surfaced recently, action was taken based on the probe report and eleven officials were suspended.

"I will look into recent seizures made too and action will be taken; also probe is on at other prisons in the state and action will follow if anything wrong is found," the Minister added.

Police raided the high-security wing of Parappana Agrahara Central Prison here on Saturday and seized smartphones and other illegal goods.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Tuesday, September 17, said the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024 will be passed in the Parliament in the coming days. He said the Bill is committed to the management, preservation and misuse of Waqf properties.

The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Waqf Bill will meet from September 18 to 20. The JPC is scrutinising the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2024 which seeks to amend the Waqf (Amendment) Act of 2013.

On September 14, a Muslim organisation headed by Congress MP Tariq Anwar demanded the rejection of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill. The organisation alleged that the proposed legislation is an "indirect attempt to seize control of Muslim religious properties".

The All India Qaumi Tanzeem submitted 14 pages of suggestions and objections to the bill to the JPC through the Lok Sabha Secretariat.

The Bill was introduced in Lok Sabha on August 8.

On September 11, a Rajya Sabha panel summoned Minority Affairs Ministry officials to explain reasons for the delay in completing the process for framing subordinate legislation under the 2013 Waqf law.

The new bill seeks to change the registration process for Waqf properties through a centralised portal. It proposes several things, including establishing a Central Waqf Council alongside state Waqf Boards with representation to Muslim women and non-Muslim representatives.

A contentious provision of the Bill is the proposal to designate the district collector as the primary authority in determining whether a property is classified as Waqf or government land.

The Waqf (Amendment) Bill also aims at renaming the act to the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act, 1995.