Today, On 29th December, The Supreme Court heard a petition challenging demolition of a structure a madarsa on Mehrauli–Badarpur Road. CJI Surya Kant said, “If it were a historical structure, we could have examined it, but this concerns an illegal slum-area structure.”
“The Uttar Pradesh government has defended the Madarsa Act before the Supreme Court, arguing that striking down the entire legislation was unnecessary. The state contended that only specific provisions should be modified if needed, as the Act regulates education for Madarsas, which offer a different curriculum compared to regular institutions.”
A Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud is hearing a challenge to the Allahabad High Court’s decision declaring the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, unconstitutional. The outcome will significantly impact the regulation of madarsa education and minority rights in Uttar Pradesh and beyond.
A plea filed in the Supreme Court to halt the demolition of a mosque in Delhi, with senior advocate Sanjay Hegde bringing attention to the case. The court, led by Justices Sanjiv Khanna and R. Mahadevan, scheduled a hearing for August 1. The appeal challenges the Delhi High Court’s decision not to stay the demolition, asserting the mosque’s rightful allocation of land in 1979. This case reflects wider concerns about preserving historical and religious structures in Delhi amidst urban development.
The Delhi High Court has granted the caretaker of a mosque and madarsa in Hazrat Nizamuddin one month to vacate the premises before its scheduled demolition. This decision comes after the petitioner’s request for sufficient time to seek legal remedies. The court ordered authorities to allow the caretaker to vacate the site within the specified period.
CJI D Y Chandrachud led bench, Today (April 5th) issued an interim stay on the Allahabad HC’s order, which deemed the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, unconstitutional and contrary to secular principles. The Court also sent notices to the Centre, Uttar Pradesh government, and other concerned parties regarding the petitions challenging the high court’s ruling.
