Firstly, for a simple understanding, position of an MLA is similar to that of an MP, with only difference being that while MLA is at state level, MP is at national level.
Next thing to understand is, that currently, there is no minimum educational qualification required to take position of MLA/MP, but there is a set of other qualifications which one needs to meet to become MLA/MP. One such qualification from set is that the member is elected by the people of that particular constituency and represents those people in the legislative assembly and debates on issues related to his or her constituency.
The issue of educational qualification has been debated on various forums. A historical perspective of the same is, our constitution was written post-independence which we got because of the sacrifices of freedom fighters, some illiterate and some highly qualified. So it is not a big surprise that some the politicians at that time who in turn were also freedom fighters, didn't know how to read and write. The constitution makers so didn't impose any restriction about educational degree to become MP or MLA.
Here are some pointers for you to consider before you form your opinion:
There should be a minimum qualification:
- The elected members sit in the Legislative body, be it Parliament or State Legislature. It is absolutely derogatory to the dignity of the Nation as well as the Constitution, to let someone without even basic education to sit there.
- It is questionable that the high officials are being regulated by the persons, who are suffering from the want of minimum academic qualification.
- It is unacceptable that the Constitution speaks for promotion of the dignity of the Nation, and Parliament is abstaining from making any amendment in the Representation of People Act, 1951 for requiring the minimum academic qualification for contesting the elections.
- A lesson is to be learnt from the Full Bench Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, passed on 10.12.2015 in Rajbala -Vs- State of Haryana, reported in (2016) 2 SCC 445, where the Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to confirm the constitutionality of the amendment in the Haryana Panchayti Raj Act, 1994, requiring the minimum academic qualification for contesting the elections.
- If politics as a career is aspired, no education definitely sets bad ideals for coming generations.
- The constitution of India does not mention any educational qualification neither for the electorate nor for the candidates to be elected. This was a prudent vision when the literacy rate was only 18.33 in 1950-51. But, now the situation is changed. The literacy rate in 2011 was 74.04. Should we move at the same pace with leaders having no education?
There is no need for a minimum qualification:
- Institutional qualification is different from wisdom & the latter is important.
- The intelligence of someone doesn't depend on degrees but on his political achievements.
- Running a government taking decisions, controlling large population and people under you is not an easy job. There is no scientific theory that an educated person will definitely do well in every domain of life than an uneducated person.
- Our education system doesn’t gives us any chance to be practical, which is essential for the spoken post.
- As for things that need "real qualifications", like finance or industry or whatever, there are enough IAS officers to help you with the details and expert advice.
- Democracy gives every one equal rights to choose and become the leader indifferent of cast, color, creed or any other parameter. This would be defeated if there is minimum education requirement.