Islamic Academy of Education v State of Karnataka 2003

CASE– Islamic Academy of Education v State of Karnataka 2003

PARTIES

PETITIONER :- Islamic Academy of education & another.

RESPONDENT:- State of Karnataka & another

DATE OF JUDGMENT:- 14/8/2003

BENCH:- V.N KHARE CJI & S.N. VARIAVA & K.G. BALAKRISHNAN & ARIJIT PASAYAT & S.B. SINHA 

INTRODUCTION

Islamic Academy of education is a philanthropic Muslim minority educational Trust, It is dedicated to the upliftment of socially, economically and educationally backward communities. It was established in 1991.  They filed a writ petition in the year 1993 to establish the educational institution of their choice. This case was placed before a bench of five judges . This case was a five judges bench case which was constituted to interpret a decision of eleven judges in a judicially extraordinary procedure . And right to education under article 21,30 and issues related to minority educational institutions were discussed in this case. 

FACTS OF THE CASE

This case was a five judges bench case. After the judgment was delivered in T.M.A Pai Foundation V. State of Karnataka case on 31st October 2002. The five judges bench has been constituted. So that the doubts regarding the decision of 11 judges could be clarified. The Petitioner Islamic Academy of education filed a writ petition in the year 1993 under Article 30 which was placed before a bench of five judges. Which can allow minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice but the majority judgment stated that Article 30 had been enacted not for the purpose of giving any special right or privileges to the minority educational institutions but to ensure that the minorities had equal rights with the majority. Most of the petitioners are unaided professional educational institutions. They are both minority and non minority . 

ISSUES

1.  Whether the Educational Institution fixes the fee structure.
2. Whether the Rights of Minorities Educational Institution and Non- Minority Educational Institution are same.
3. Whether the Private & Unaided college handle their admission process and seats itself.

ARGUMENTS

APPELLANT:- Islamic Academy of education & Anr.

• On behalf of Islamic Academy of education , It was submitted that the private, unaided professional educational institutions had been given complete autonomy regarding termination of their own fee structure for purpose of development of education and expansion of the institutions & As long as there was no profiteering of capitation fee there could be no interference by the government.
• It was also submitted that in any event the institutions should be given a choice and be allowed to admit students on the basis of ICSC or SSC or other such examinations.
• On behalf of Non- Minority it was submitted that they also had a fundamental right to establish and administer educational institutions.

RESPONDENT :- State Of Karnataka & Anr.

• It was submitted that the Union of India, The State , Universities had statutory rights to fix the fees and to regulate admission of students. So that there was no profiteering, capitation fees were not charged, admissions were based on principles of merit etc . Unless it was ensured that colleges admit students strictly on the basis of merit at a common entrance test , It would be impossible to ensure that capitation fees were not charged and that there was no profiteering. 

• It was also submitted that the right to set up and administer an educational institution was not an absolute right and this right is subject to reasonable restrictions.

JUDGMENT  

• In this case it was held that the supreme court stated that Islamic Academy of education are entitled to autonomy in their administration but they should keep in mind the principle of merit & should also make provisions for students from the poorer and backward sections of society. And the government could prescribe the percentage of seats according to local needs.
• It was also held that in unaided non- minority professional colleges certain percentage of seats could be reserved for those students who had passed the common entrance test held by the state or University and the rest of the seats filled up on the basis of counseling by the state and different percentage of seats could be fixed by the government for minority & non- minority institutions.
• It was stated that minority rights are also an important part of national interest.

CONCLUSION

In the case of UnniKrishnan V. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993). The Supreme Court laid down a scheme and its validity was questioned by the Islamic Academy of education by filing a writ petition in the year 1993 before the bench of five judges. So In this case the Supreme court of India tried its level best to safeguard the educational rights of the minorities. This judgment provides that minority rights are also an important part of national interest and provides freedom to the institutions to fix its own fee structure. So that they can generate funds to run the institutions and provide necessary facilities for the benefit of the students and can also generate surplus which can be used by them for the betterment and growth of their educational institutions and not to seek any aid from the government and provide maximum autonomy for the excellence in professional education as the restrictions can not be reasonable as it can made it difficult for educational institutions to run efficiently. 

REFERENCE

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1978528/

https://yenepoyagroup.com/islamic_academy_education.htm

written by Ritika Sharma intern under legal vidhiya.