A bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Vivek Saran observed that human rights commissions are not tribunals and cannot act like courts to adjudicate disputes
NEW DELHI — Criticising the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) for exceeding its jurisdiction by ordering an inquiry into 558 aided madrasas in Uttar Pradesh, the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday said it was “prima facie astounded” by the action. The court also questioned whether such directions fall within the commission’s legal powers.
A bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Vivek Saran observed that human rights commissions are not tribunals and cannot act like courts to adjudicate disputes.
The case stems from the NHRC’s direction to the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) to investigate the matter.
“The commission must realise that it is not a tribunal under the law which can try cases,” the bench noted, adding that such issues could instead be addressed by constitutional courts through appropriate legal remedies.
In a strong observation, the court described the NHRC action as selective intervention by human rights bodies.
“This court is not aware of the NHRC taking suo motu cognisance in situations where vigilantes take the law into their own hands,” the bench said. It added that there was little evidence of action in cases where members of the Muslim community faced violence or lynching.
The judges remarked that even everyday interactions across communities have become “fearful acts” in some situations, yet such matters rarely see suo motu action from commissions.
The court noted that the NHRC “dabbled” in matters that do not disclose a prima facie violation of fundamental or human rights. The investigation into administrative irregularities of the madrasas was viewed as an overreach into general governance rather than human rights protection.
The observations came during a hearing of a petition filed by the Teachers Association Madaris Arabia, which challenged the NHRC’s February 2025 order.
The complaint before the NHRC had alleged irregularities in aided madrasas, including misuse of government funds and appointment of unqualified teachers.
However, the petitioners argued that the NHRC does not have the authority to order such an inquiry, especially in cases not involving direct human rights violations or those older than one year.
Earlier, the court had stayed the NHRC order in September 2025. During the latest hearing, it extended the interim relief and issued notice to the commission.
The bench said that if intervention was required, the commission could file a complaint or recommend registration of an FIR, but directly ordering probes in such matters raised legal concerns.
The matter will now be heard along with related cases on May 11.
