AMU Minority Status : SC overrules 1967 verdict on Aligarh Muslim University minority status

Supreme Court’s Judgment on AMU Minority Status

Are you looking whether SC overrules 1967 verdict on AMU minority status? No worry! Let’s check this blog.

The Supreme Court pronounced the verdict on whether Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) holds minority status under Article 30 of the Indian Constitution, which grants religious and linguistic minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions. The Supreme Court concluded that the term “establish” in Article 30 means “to bring into existence or to create” and cannot be conflated with generic phrases such as “genesis of the institution” or the “founding moment of the institution”.

The Aligarh Muslim University Community expressed satisfaction on Friday (8^th Nov, 2024) regarding the Supreme Court’s decision about the institution’s minority status, affirming it aligns with the core principles that led to the university’s establishment. “It is a comprehensive win for minority rights in general and AMU in particular,” professor Faizan Mustafa, an authority on Constitutional Law and former AMU registrar who had presented this case to the Supreme Court in his ex-officio.

Supreme Court by 4:3 majority overruled the 1967 Aziz Basha Judgment which said that the university cannot be considered a minority institution since it was created by a central law. Thus, an educational institution can claim ‘minority tag’ only if established and managed by a minority community.

The three dissenting judges on the Constitution bench today were justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma, while three others – J. Sanjiv Khanna, JV Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, as well as the outgoing Chief Justice, held the majority.

Majority Verdict

Reading for the majority, the CJI underlined the importance of identifying the university’s actual point of origin i.e. its genesis – to establish AMU minority status. Because AMU had been ‘incorporated’ by imperial legislation – it was founded in 1875 as the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College and converted to a university by a British Raj in 1920 – does not mean it was not ‘established’ by members of a minority community, the court said.

A key point is that the court said it is not necessary for an institution to be established for the benefit of a minority community, or for its administration to rest with members of that community. Minority institution may also wish to emphasis secular education, it noted. The court further said that the government could regulate minority educational institutions as long as it does not infringe on the character of such institutes.

Dissenting arguments

Justice S C Sharma said his opinion is neither concurring nor dissenting with the majority opinion authored by CJI Chandrachud. However, he agreed with dissents that the two Judges bench could not have referred the case directly to a seven Judges bench.

Justice Datta asked can a two Judges bench tomorrow doubt ‘basic structure doctrine’ propounded in Keshwananda Bharati case and refer it to 15 Judge Bench directly? The majority opinion will set a very dangerous opinion, he said and ruled that AMU is not a minority institution.

Justice Sharma said Constitution does not permit any preferential treatment to minority institutions vis-a-vis other institutions. What is needed is bringing minority educational institutions on par with other institutions.

Justice Surya Kant said the five-judge bench of SC in Aziz Basha case had correctly decided that AMU was not a minority institution, which has attained finality, and that there is no need to reopen the inquiry into the character of AMU.

SC laid down indicia for determining whether an educational institution is a minority institution or not

The Supreme Court in seven Judge bench by 4 to 3 majority verdicts laid down indicia for determining whether an educational institution is a minority institution but did not answer whether Aligarh Muslim University is a minority educational institution. It overruled 1967 Judgment in Aziz Basha.

What others said

Let’s check what others said on AMU Minority Status!

Some critics claimed AMU received over Rs. 5000 crores in central funding between 2019 and 2023, much more than other central universities like the University of Delhi, suggesting the institution derives national, not minority, interests.

Solicitor General Tushar Metha, argued that AMU’s significant central government funding and its national importance status disqualify it from claiming minority status.

Proponents, including Lawyer Kapil Sibal, argue that the composition of AMU’s governing council, with 37 Muslim members out of 180, still qualifies it as a Muslim minority institution, emphasizing the application of Article 30 of the Constitution.