MS. ARUNA ROY AND OTHERS versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2002] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 266 · Decided: 12-09-2002 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.B. SHAH · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
MS. ARUNA ROY AND OTHERS 
V, 
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 
B 
[M.B. SHAH, D.M. DHARMADHIKARI AND H.K. SEMA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, I950; Articles 2I, 27, 28, J2 and 5JA: 
PJL-Publication of National Curriculum Framework for School 
C Education 2000(NCFS.E.) by NCE.R.T.--Challenge on grounds of non-
consultation with Central Advisory Board of Education, and as being 
unconstitutional and anti-secular-Held unfounded-Hence rejected. 
Non-consultation with CABE-Effect of-Held, CABE being a non-
D statutory body constituted by the Government in exercise of its executive 
fanction, consultation before finalisation of Education Policy is not mandatory--
Besides, N CE.R. T. is a statuto1y body comprising of experts and Members of 
Parliament-Thus, formulation of NCFS.E. 2000 without consultation with 
CABE is not violative of established principles/statutory provisions/rules. 
E 
Secularistic democracy-preservation of-Held, NCFS.E. emphasizing 
on study of basic tenets of all religions besides assurance by the Central 
Government that no personal prejudices or narrow minded preceptions are 
allowed to distort the real purpose. Hence, secular features of the Constitution 
remained undisturbed/unaffected. 
F 
Educational Institutions maintained out of State fund-Imparting of 
religious instructioi1s-Prohibitions-Scope and ambit of-Held, NCFSE 
comprise teaching of religious philosophy and culture particularly for having 
value based social life in the society which is also in conformity with 
fundamental duty enshrined under Article 5I(A). Thus, NCFS.E. is not 
G unconstitutional as being violative of Article 28. 
Petitioner filed Public Interest Litigation under Article 32 of the 
Constitution of India challenging publication of the National Curriculum 
Framework for School Education (NCFSE) by N.C.E.R.T. on the grounds 
that there was no consultation with .Central Advisory Board of Education 
H (CABE), that it wa~ unconstitutional and it has anti-secular features. 
266 
MS. ARUNA ROY v. U.0.l. 
267 
Dismissing the petition, the Court 
A 
HELD: Per Shah, J. : 
I.I. CABE is not constituted under any Act or Rules, hence not a 
statutory body. However, it is not disputed that it continuously functioned 
since 1935 to 1994. As per Resolution dated 10th April, 1986 issued by B 
the Ministry of Human Resources Development (Deptt. of Education), 
Government of India, CABE consists of 104 Members including ex-officio 
members, members nominated by the Government and members elected 
by the Parliament. The Resolution also requires that the Board would meet 
at least once a year and there shall not be a gap of more than two years C 
between two consecutive meetings of the Board. The tenure of office of 
members of the Board other than Ex-officio members was three years 
effective from the date of notification. Subsequently, on 19th October, 
1990, Government of India passed another Resolution reconstituting 
CABE. From these two resolutions, it is apparent that the functions of 
CABE are limited. It nowhere mandates that before framing national D 
curriculum framework for school education, the Government shall consult 
CABE and act as per its advice. Admittedly, CABE for one or the other 
reason was not reconstituted since 1994 as neither the Government has 
nominated the members nor the Parliament has elected members as 
required by the 1990 Resolution. As per the Resolution, the tenure of office E 
of the members of the Board other than ex-officio members was only for 
three years. Thereafter, no further resolution is passed reconstituting the 
CABE. [277-G, H; 278-A, H; 279-A, B; F; 281-E[ 
1.2. The main function of CABE as per the resolutions is to review F 
the progress of education from time to time and to appraise the extent 
and manner in which the Education Policy has been implemented by the 
Central and State Governments and other concerned agencies and to give 
appropriate advice in the matter. It can also advise· the Government 
regarding coordination between the Ccntr11l Government and the State 
Government for educational development in accordance with the G 
Education Policy. Suo moto also, it can advise on any education question. 
From the report of the Ministry of Human Resources Development, it is 
apparent that CABE is only an advisory body and there are other 
institutions including the NCERT which also assist the Government in 
formulation and implementation of education policies and prog
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.