LI Network
Published on: 8 September 2023 at 10:59 IST
The Allahabad High Court affirmed the state government’s authority to take action without strictly adhering to the principles of natural justice. Case title: Anjuman Siddiquia Jamia Noorul Oloom and Ors. v. State of U.P and Ors.
The case involved a petition challenging an order issued by the Special Secretary, Government of U.P., Lucknow, directing action against the petitioners based on a report submitted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT).
The Court upheld the legality of the SIT’s preliminary inquiry and emphasized the state government’s power to take immediate action, even in emergent circumstances.
Justice Kshitij Shailendra, presiding over a Single Judge Bench, explained that while principles of natural justice were considered, the authority to withdraw or take action against Madarsas rested with the Board under Section 10 of the Act, 2004.
The State Government’s role was outlined in Section 13 of the same Act, allowing it to communicate with the Board regarding any matter of concern.
The Court clarified that the State Government had the right to address the Board and convey its views, and there were provisions for communication between the State Government and the Board.
The closure of a Madarsa did not necessarily mean the withdrawal of recognition, and action could still be taken against it.
Regarding the interplay between the Board and the State Government, the Court highlighted that Section 13 of the Act empowered the State Government to communicate with the Board and issue directions consistent with the Act after considering any explanations or representations made by the Board. Both entities had the authority to act if any illegality or violation of recognition terms came to their attention.
In conclusion, the Court denied the petitioners’ requests to quash the SIT report and related government actions, emphasizing the legality of the State Government’s actions under the relevant legal provisions.