Rajasthan High Court Seeks State’s Response On Effective Management And Control Of Madarsas
The Court also directed the State to consider the petitioner’s suggestions concerning regulation, school education, teacher qualifications and oversight of Madarsas.
The Rajasthan High Court has directed the State’s Additional Advocate General to file a detailed affidavit suggesting effective measures for the management, control and operation of Madarsas in Rajasthan.
The Court was hearing connected writ petitions questioning the rules and regulatory framework governing approximately 3,000 Madarsas in Rajasthan, including the alleged absence of effective State supervision and educational oversight.
A Bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma observed: “Mr. B.L. Bhati, learned Additional Advocate General, in these circumstances, is directed to file a detailed affidavit suggesting effective steps, which can be taken for effective management, control and operation of the Madarsas in the State of Rajasthan.”
Advocate Moti Singh appeared for the petitioner. Advocate Deepak Chandak appeared for B.L. Bhati, Additional Advocate General, among the counsel representing the respondents.
Background
The petitioner raised questions concerning the functioning of approximately 3,000 Madarsas and the rules and regulations governing them. The petition alleged an absence of effective control, supervision and regulatory oversight by the State or authorities possessing expertise in education.
Counsel for the petitioner contended that the existing operational guidelines did not provide an effective mechanism for governing Madarsas. He also submitted that the Rajasthan Madarsa Board Act, 2020 lacked effective provisions to control the education imparted by these institutions.
The petitioner consequently sought measures for the effective management and control of Madarsas and for education to be imparted by competent teachers.
The proposals placed before the Court included preparing reports on Madarsas also conducting secondary or senior-secondary education under RBSE or CBSE affiliation; framing a syllabus and common examination programme for children in primary and upper-primary Madarsas; creating a portal containing student details; prescribing educational qualifications for teachers; and ensuring school education under the Right to Education Act, 2009.
Other proposals concerned State funding for religious teachers, implementation of recommendations relating to alleged irregularities, the education of non-Muslim children and action against institutions that did not satisfy primary or upper-primary school norms.
Court’s Observations
The Court recorded the nature and scale of the concerns raised in the petitions regarding “the functioning and operation of approximately 3,000 Madarsas in the State of Rajasthan.”
It noted that the petitions questioned the applicable rules and regulations and highlighted the alleged absence of effective control, supervision and regulatory oversight by the State and authorities possessing educational expertise.
The Court observed the petitioner’s submission that the existing guidelines required improvement, stating: “Learned counsel submits that even the guidelines for the operation of these Madarsas in the State of Rajasthan are not proper for effective governance and operation and, therefore, an effective mechanism is required for proper functioning of Madarsas in the State of Rajasthan.”
Among the suggestions placed before the Court was a proposal that the Education Department frame a syllabus and a common examination programme for children studying in primary and upper-primary Madarsas under the supervision of the District Institute of Education and Training in each district.
The petitioner also proposed: “That the Minority Department/ Education Department may kindly be directed to ensure that all children from muslim community who are attending Madarsas may impart the school education in terms of the Right to Education Act, 2009.”
The Court did not, at this stage, accept or issue substantive directions implementing them.
The Court, accordingly, directed the Additional Advocate General to file a detailed affidavit identifying effective measures that could be adopted for managing, controlling and operating Madarsas in Rajasthan.
It further ordered, “to take into consideration the suggestions given by the petitioner for improving the situation of the Madarsas operating in the State of Rajasthan.”
Conclusion
The matter remains pending and has been listed on October 27, 2026.
Cause Title: Pratipal Singh v. State of Rajasthan
Appearances
Petitioner: Advocate Moti Singh
Respondents: Advocate Vaibhav Bhansali for BO Bora, Senior Central Government Standing Counsel; Advocate Deepak Chandak for B.L. Bhati, Additional Advocate General; Advocates Rishabh Tayal, Muskan Jangid, Shyam Sunder Paliwal, Jogendra Singh