A Bench headed by CJI, DY Chandrachud said that the Allahabad High Court erred in holding that the Madarsa Education Act, 2004 was bound to be struck down for violation of the basic structure.

However, the CJI Chandrachud-led Bench held the Madarsa Education Act “unconstitutional” to the extent it regulates higher education in relation to 'fazil' and 'kamil' degrees for being in conflict with the UGC Act.

Earlier in April, staying the impugned decision, the Bench, also comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, had observed that the Allahabad High Court misconstrued the provisions of the Madarsa Act and the view taken by it was prima facie not correct.

Delivering a verdict on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate challenging vires of the Madarsa Act, 2004, the Allahabad HC, in its March 22 order, had held the law violative of the principles of secularism, Articles 14, 21 and 21-A of the Constitution of India and Section 22 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956.

It had asked the Uttar Pradesh government to take steps to accommodate madrasa students in regular schools, adding that if required, new schools would be established to ensure that children between the ages of 6 to 14 years are not left without admission in duly recognised institutions.

With less than a week's time left to him in the highest judicial office of the country, CJI Chandrachud is yet to pronounce several important decisions, including the AMU minority status case.

Before his retirement on November 10, the CJI-led Constitution Bench will also decide the question as to whether Light Motor Vehicle (LMV) licence holders require a separate endorsement to drive a transport vehicle of LMV class.