The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently expressed concern over the lack of any educational qualification requirements for those seeking to become Members of Parliament (MPs) or Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs). This observation has been made while the court was dismissing a criminal complaint against Rao Narbir Singh, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and former MLA. Background of the Case Based on a false report, an election affidavit, the accused Rao Narbir Singh filed a criminal complaint. It was complained that the respondent Singh had suppressed material facts and filed false declarations as to his educational qualifications. The court, after examining the evidence, gave the reason for dismissing the complaint as there was no sufficient ground for prosecution. Observations on Educational Qualifications by the Court While stating this during the hearing, the court said, "the issue of educational qualifications for MPs and MLAs is a matter of public concern." The bench lamented, "While some professions require rigorous educational and professional qualifications, no such qualification was expected from the people who wished to become lawmakers." It also highlighted that educational qualification could make a huge difference in terms of improving the quality of debates and decision-making processes in the legislature. Further, the court's observations upon the general implications of legislatures devoid of a minimum educational requirement included: If laws and decisions pertaining to millions are drawn by persons not in possession of the requisite relevant knowledge and acumen on account of lack of criteria, it will decimate the efficacy of the whole legislation and take away from its dignity. Legal and Constitutional Considerations The court, while voicing these apprehensions, however felt obliged to point out that Constitution of India has not laid down any educational qualification for MPs and MLAs and that the basic qualifications for contesting election to the Parliament and State Legislatures relate to age, citizenship, and crime record. The Courts' observations were thus not intended to be a test of constitutionality of the existing system but to emphasize the desirability of reconsideration of these criteria. The court also took note that any alteration in the eligibility criteria for MPs and MLAs would require a constitutional amendment-a process comprising large doses of political and legal difficulties. It left the issue to be taken up with the policy framers and legislatures of the day who are competent to propose and bring about changes. Conclusion The remarks from the Punjab and Haryana High Court raise a storm over whether educational qualifications should not be a pre-requisite to holding public office in India. The court has dismissed the criminal complaint against Rao Narbir Singh, but marked in its observation the fast-emerging concern that lawmakers too need to have certain minimum level of education and competency. It is as yet unclear whether this will be the cause of changes in legislation, but for sure, the comments of the court brought this issue into the lion's share of attention among the general public.