Logo

Supreme Court Declines Third Plea by Ashwini Upadhyay Seeking Regulation of Religious Education Institutions for Children

CB News Desk

Supreme Court declines Ashwini Upadhyay’s third plea seeking regulation of institutions imparting religious education to children, directing him toward enforcement of earlier proceedings. - Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India

Advertisement
Supreme Court Declines Third Plea by Ashwini Upadhyay Seeking Regulation of Religious Education Institutions for Children
Join Telegram

The Supreme Court on August 10, 2026, declined to entertain a third writ petition filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking registration, recognition and supervision of institutions imparting religious education to children up to 14 years of age.

A bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M Pancholi pointed out that petitions on the same issue had already been considered earlier.

Advertisement

Background of the Case

Upadhyay’s latest petition alleged that several unregistered institutions were providing religious instruction to young children without adequate state supervision. The plea sought directions for bringing such institutions within a regulatory framework.

It also raised questions concerning Article 30 of the Constitution, which protects the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. The petitioner argued that this provision should not be interpreted as granting protection to institutions primarily imparting religious instruction.

The petition further sought to distinguish religious institutions from secular and professional educational institutions.

Supreme Court’s Observation

The bench noted that the petitioner had already approached the Court twice over substantially the same issue.

Justice Aravind Kumar observed that the petitioner already had an earlier order in his favour concerning representation to the authorities and advised him to pursue enforcement of that order rather than filing another writ petition.

The Court remarked,

“You have already taken a writ which is in your favour, enforce the writ.”

The bench also indicated that if the earlier direction had not been complied with, the petitioner could pursue an appropriate contempt remedy.

Decision

In view of the earlier proceedings, Upadhyay chose to withdraw the present petition.

Advertisement

The Supreme Court accordingly dismissed the petition as withdrawn, with liberty to pursue the appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

Case Details

Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India

Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 868/2026, Diary No. 41685/2026

Judge: Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M Pancholi

Decision Date: August 10, 2026

Advertisement

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
CourtBook Mobile App