SC Verdict on  AMU’s Minority Status

Syllabus: GS 2/Governance 

In News 

• The Supreme Court ruled that an institution founded by a minority community retains its minority status even when recognized by statute.

Case Background

• The judgment was in response to petitions seeking minority status for Aligarh Muslim University (AMU).
  • AMU’s minority status, established in 1875, was restored by the AMU (Amendment) Act in 1981.
• Petitioners challenged the 1967 S. Azeez Basha v. Union of India case, which had held that AMU could not be considered a minority institution.

Supreme Court’s Observations

• Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud held that a minority institution could claim minority status, but the community must prove it was established to preserve its cultural identity.
• Interpretation of Article 30(1): Article 30(1) allows religious and linguistic minorities to establish and manage educational institutions.
  • The Chief Justice classified Article 30(1) as anti-discriminatory and a “special rights” provision for minorities.
  • Legislation or actions that discriminate against minority institutions are invalid under Article 30(1).
  • Minority institutions are guaranteed autonomy in administration under this provision.
• Scope of Minority Status: The protection under Article 30(1) also applies to universities established before the Constitution.
  • Institutions need not be exclusively for the minority community, but “predominantly” benefit them.
• State Regulation: State regulation of minority institutions is allowed but must not infringe on their minority character.
• Right to Administer: An institution’s minority character is not lost if management is not directly run by the founding community.
  • Minority institutions can appoint others to manage the institution, especially in specialized fields like law or medicine, to ensure educational values are emphasized.

Source: IE