The Supreme Court today referred a challenge to a rule mandating the daily recital of a Shloka and a prayer at Kendriya Vidyalayas across the country to a larger bench..The Court had issued notice in the matter in January last year. And today, the Bench of Justice Rohinton Nariman and Vineet Saran ordered that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for listing before a larger bench..Veenayak Shah, an Advocate from Madhya Pradesh, had filed the petition back in 2017, challenging Article 92 of Chapter 10 of the Revised Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan insofar as the common prayer mandated under the provision..The provision mandates the recital of a Sanskrit Shloka (the Pavamana Mantra) followed by a prayer in Hindi. As per the provision, all students, irrespective of faith and belief, are required to perform the prayer by closing their eyes and folding their hands..The same has been challenged on the grounds that it is violative of the Articles 21, 25, 28(1) and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The petition states,.“…parents and children of the minority communities as well as Atheist and others who do not agree with this system of Prayer such as Agnostics, Sceptisists, Rationalists and others would find the imposition of this prayer constitutionally impermissible.”.Further, the right to religion under Article 25 ought to include the right not to pray at all, Shah contends in his petition..“…students and teachers are entitled either to pray according to the prayer practices of their religion and according to the teachings, customs, ways of worship and practices and rituals; or not to pray at all. The exercise of these Constitutional rights includes the Right to not pray at all.”.Moreover, the petition states that the rule is in violation of Article 28, which prohibits religious instruction in any educational institution wholly maintained out of state funds. It is submitted that the common prayer is a “religious instruction” within the meaning of Article 28, and should therefore be prohibited. Reference is made to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Aruna Roy & Ors. v. Union of India, in which it was held,.“Special care has to be taken for avoiding possibility of imparting “Religious Instructions” in the name of “Religious Education”..It is also claimed that the rule violates the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and that the practice of enforcing the recital of the prayer in the schools creates obstacles in developing a scientific temperament among the students..Thus, a direction to all Kendriya Vidyalayas to discontinue the prayer at morning assemblies has been prayed for..The Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind, an organization of Islamic scholars, had also filed an impleadment application in the matter, with a view to expressing the perspective of the Muslim community on the issue..The IA refers to the case of Bijoe Emmanuel and Others v. State of Kerala and Others, wherein the Supreme Court quashed circulars mandating the singing of the National Anthem in a Kerala school where two Jehovah’s witnesses were expelled for not standing for the Anthem..Advocate Satya Mitra appeared for the petitioner, and Advocate Ejaz Maqbool represented the intervenors..Read the petition:.Read the Impleadment Application:
The Supreme Court today referred a challenge to a rule mandating the daily recital of a Shloka and a prayer at Kendriya Vidyalayas across the country to a larger bench..The Court had issued notice in the matter in January last year. And today, the Bench of Justice Rohinton Nariman and Vineet Saran ordered that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India for listing before a larger bench..Veenayak Shah, an Advocate from Madhya Pradesh, had filed the petition back in 2017, challenging Article 92 of Chapter 10 of the Revised Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalayas Sangathan insofar as the common prayer mandated under the provision..The provision mandates the recital of a Sanskrit Shloka (the Pavamana Mantra) followed by a prayer in Hindi. As per the provision, all students, irrespective of faith and belief, are required to perform the prayer by closing their eyes and folding their hands..The same has been challenged on the grounds that it is violative of the Articles 21, 25, 28(1) and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The petition states,.“…parents and children of the minority communities as well as Atheist and others who do not agree with this system of Prayer such as Agnostics, Sceptisists, Rationalists and others would find the imposition of this prayer constitutionally impermissible.”.Further, the right to religion under Article 25 ought to include the right not to pray at all, Shah contends in his petition..“…students and teachers are entitled either to pray according to the prayer practices of their religion and according to the teachings, customs, ways of worship and practices and rituals; or not to pray at all. The exercise of these Constitutional rights includes the Right to not pray at all.”.Moreover, the petition states that the rule is in violation of Article 28, which prohibits religious instruction in any educational institution wholly maintained out of state funds. It is submitted that the common prayer is a “religious instruction” within the meaning of Article 28, and should therefore be prohibited. Reference is made to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Aruna Roy & Ors. v. Union of India, in which it was held,.“Special care has to be taken for avoiding possibility of imparting “Religious Instructions” in the name of “Religious Education”..It is also claimed that the rule violates the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and that the practice of enforcing the recital of the prayer in the schools creates obstacles in developing a scientific temperament among the students..Thus, a direction to all Kendriya Vidyalayas to discontinue the prayer at morning assemblies has been prayed for..The Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind, an organization of Islamic scholars, had also filed an impleadment application in the matter, with a view to expressing the perspective of the Muslim community on the issue..The IA refers to the case of Bijoe Emmanuel and Others v. State of Kerala and Others, wherein the Supreme Court quashed circulars mandating the singing of the National Anthem in a Kerala school where two Jehovah’s witnesses were expelled for not standing for the Anthem..Advocate Satya Mitra appeared for the petitioner, and Advocate Ejaz Maqbool represented the intervenors..Read the petition:.Read the Impleadment Application:
