Supreme Court Ruling on Aligarh Muslim University’s Minority Status: Key Aspects and Implications

Supreme Court Ruling on Aligarh Muslim University’s Minority Status: Key Aspects and Implications

Sub: Polity

Sec: Constitution

Why in News

• The Supreme Court of India recently overturned a landmark 1967 judgment, enabling Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) to potentially claim minority institution status. The judgment, reversed the S. Azeez Basha vs. Union of India ruling, which had previously denied AMU this status. This decision is significant for AMU’s future autonomy and its ability to reserve seats for Muslim students, sparking discussions on the rights of minority institutions in India.

Background of the Case

• AMU was originally established as Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College in 1875 by Muslim reformer Sir Syed Ahmed Khan to provide modern education rooted in Islamic values.
• In 1920, the Aligarh Muslim University Act (AMU Act) transformed MAO College into AMU, an institution primarily for Muslims but open to students of other religions.
• Initially, only Muslims could be members of AMU’s governing body (the “Court”), but this mandate was removed in 1951.
• 1967 Azeez Basha Judgment: It held that AMU could not be a minority institution since it was established by central legislation, not by the Muslim community itself.
• 1981 Amendment of AMU Act: In response to the 1967 judgment, the AMU Act was amended in 1981 to officially recognize AMU’s minority status.
• In 2005, AMU introduced a policy to reserve 50% of seats in postgraduate medical courses for Muslim students. This was challenged, and the Allahabad High Court struck it down based on the Azeez Basha ruling.
• In 2006, the Supreme Court stayed the reservation policy, and the case was referred to a larger bench.
• In 2019, the case was assigned to a seven-judge bench for a comprehensive review, culminating in the recent 2023 verdict.

What does the Constitution say about minorities?

• Article 29, which deals with the “Protection of interests of minorities”, says that “any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same”, and that “no citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them”.
• Article 30: Article 30 of the Indian Constitution states the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.
• It says: “All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.”
• Article 30(1A) deals with the fixation of the amount for acquisition of property of any educational institution established by minority groups.
• Article 30(2) states that the government should not discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion or language, while giving aid.
• According to the T.M.A. Pai Foundation (2002) ruling, minority status should be determined based on the demographic composition of the relevant state rather than the national population.
• Minority institutions have greater autonomy compared to others and are exempt from providing reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) under Article 15(5).
• They are permitted to reserve up to 50% of their seats for students from their own community.
• The Supreme Court majority held that educational institutions established before the Constitution’s adoption are equally entitled to Article 30(1) protections.
• CJI clarified that legal recognition or status under statutory enactments does not negate an institution’s minority character if it was established primarily to benefit a minority community.