KUTBUDDIN ANSARI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Counsel for the petitioner. He submitted that this is a case that reflects the repression by a State - aided Minority Institution of its own employees of the Minority Community. The petitioner has come up before this Court questioning the correctness of his termination order on the ground that it is not only in violation of the principles of natural justice but is also in violation of the Constitutional provisions and the law which has already been framed by the State Legislature in this regard.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that it is correct that the institution is a Madarasa and is a minority institution protected under Article 30 of the Constitution of India. The conditions of service of the employees of the said Madarasa is to be regulated under the law that has been framed for that purpose and if the Rule making authority has failed to perform his duty then this Court can step in and exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the purpose of compliance of any such mandate that might be required to be pressed into service for framing the regular service conditions of such employees.

(3.) Sri Ojha submits that there is no dispute with regard to the fact that Madarasa where the petitioner is working as a Teacher is an Institution which falls within the definition of a Madarasa under the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarasa Education Act, 2004. The said Act has been framed by the State Legislature under Entry 25 of List 3 of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India. The Act was accordingly framed and notified pursuant to the provisions of Clause 3 of Article 348 of the Constitution of India and has been promulgated for being enforced. The Act has come into force with effect from 3rd of September, 2004, as per section 1 thereof.