SC Overturns its 1967 judgement, which denied minority status to AMU
Supreme Court
6 min read
On his last day as the Chief Justice of India, Justice D Y Chadrachud led 7-member constitutional bench of the Supreme Court (4 in favour and three against) overturned the previous 5-judge constitutional bench judgement in the Azeez Basha vs Union Of India 1967 case on the ‘minority status’ of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). The Supreme Court delivered the judgement on 8 November 2024.
In the Azeez Basha vs. Union of India case, the Supreme Court declared that AMU was not a minority educational institution as it was established through an act of legislature. The court opined that an institution established by an act of legislature cannot claim to be a minority institution.
The Aligarh Muslim University was set up under the provisions of the Aligarh Muslim University Act 1920.
The Supreme Court has now held that a future regular bench of the Court will decide whether Aligarh Muslim University is a minority educational institution based on the majority judgement in the present case.
Background to the Case?
The Constitution of India under Article 30 guarantees the right of the minority to establish and administer their own educational institutions. The minority has been defined based on religion or language.
In the Azeez Basha vs. Union of India case, the minority status of the AMU was challenged. The 5-member constitutional bench of the Supreme Court held that the University was not a minority institution as it was established by law (statute).
In the Malay Shukla Vs Aligarh Muslim University case 2006, the Allahabad High Court relied upon the Supreme Court judgement of the Azeez Basha case, held that the Aligarh Muslim Muslim University was not a minority institution and it cannot reserve 50 per cent Post Graduate Medical seats for muslims.
The Allahabad High Court judgement was challenged in the Supreme Court, and a three-member Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi referred the matter to a seven-judge constitutional bench in 2019.
The case was heard by the Seven-Judge bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, JB Pardiwala, Dipankar Datta, Manoj Misra, and SC Sharma.
Judgement of the Supreme Court
The majority of Chief Justices DY Chandrachud, Sanjiv Khanna, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra laid down two criteria for judging whether the educational institution was a minority or not.
These twin criteria are -Who established the University, and who was the "brain" behind it?
If the answer to these questions is a minority, then the court will declare the institution's minority educational institutions per the provision of Article 30 of the constitution.
Significance of the SC Judgement
- The present judgement has settled the constitutional question of what criteria the court will use in the future when deciding whether an institution is a minority educational institution or not.
- It also held that just because an educational institution was created by a statute (act of legislature) will not be the criteria for deciding whether it is a minority institution or not.
- In minority educational institutions, there is no provision of reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes or Educationally weaker sections of society.
- Seats are reserved only for the minority community in whose name it has been set up.
Also read: Prof Naima Khatoon, the first women VC of AMU
