Aligarh Muslim University reacts to Supreme Court decision on minority status: ‘We continue our…’
The Supreme Court deferred the question of Aligarh Muslim Unversity's minority status to a fresh bench and overruled the 1967 judgment.
The Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) on Friday said it respects the Supreme Court's decision deferring the question of minority status to a fresh bench and overruled the 1967 judgment that said the university could not be considered a minority institution since it was created by a central law.
The AMU said it remained dedicated to its legacy of academic excellence.
“We remain respectful of the court's decision and express our commitment to fully examining the judgment's details. Once our competent administrative team has completed its review, we will be in a position to address all the questions from the media in detail. For now, we continue our dedication to AMU’s legacy of academic excellence, nation building and inclusivity,” said the university's PRO Omar Peerzada.
Also read | AMU marks Gandhi Jayanti as International Day of Non-Violence
What Supreme Court said
The Supreme Court bench, headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, overruled its own judgment in the 1967 Azeez Basha case, which became the basis for denying the university minority status.
The apex court, by a 4:3 majority, said the judicial records of the case should be placed before the CJI for setting up a fresh bench to decide the validity of a 2006 Allahabad high court verdict.
{{/usCountry}}The apex court, by a 4:3 majority, said the judicial records of the case should be placed before the CJI for setting up a fresh bench to decide the validity of a 2006 Allahabad high court verdict.
{{/usCountry}}“The decision in Azeez Basha is overruled. The question of deciding the minority status of AMU must be done based on the tests laid down in the present case. Papers to be placed before the CJI for constituting a bench to decide the issue and correctness of 2006 judgement of the Allahabad high court,” held the bench in its majority opinion.
Also read | CJI Chandrachud’s last day at work, set to deliver final verdict on AMU's minority status
{{/usCountry}}“The decision in Azeez Basha is overruled. The question of deciding the minority status of AMU must be done based on the tests laid down in the present case. Papers to be placed before the CJI for constituting a bench to decide the issue and correctness of 2006 judgement of the Allahabad high court,” held the bench in its majority opinion.
Also read | CJI Chandrachud’s last day at work, set to deliver final verdict on AMU's minority status
{{/usCountry}}In January 2006, the high court had struck down the provision of the 1981 law by which AMU was accorded minority status.
{{/usCountry}}In January 2006, the high court had struck down the provision of the 1981 law by which AMU was accorded minority status.
{{/usCountry}}At the outset, CJI Chandrachud said there were four separate opinions, including three dissenting verdicts. The CJI said he has written the majority verdict for himself and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, JB Pardiwala, Manoj Misra.
Justice Chandrachud said Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma have penned their separate dissenting verdicts.
Justice Surya Kant is reading out his dissent and the pronouncement is underway. A five-judge Constitution bench had in the S Azeez Basha versus Union of India case in 1967 held that since AMU was a central university, it cannot be considered a minority institution.
However, the fabled institution got back its minority status when Parliament passed the AMU (Amendment) Act in 1981.
Benefits as a minority institution
Article 30 of the Indian Constitution states the rights of religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
Among other benefits, minority educational institutions are granted administrative autonomy, including the freedom to choose their governing bodies and other staff members. Such institutions need not reserve seats for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, other backward classes (OBC), and economically weaker sections (EWS).
A minority institution can decide admission eligibility and set its own fee structures. However, such institutions receiving state financial support cannot completely exclude students from non-minority groups.
(With agency inputs)
