The Indian legal landscape saw a significant shift on Friday as the Supreme Court delivered a historic verdict in the long-standing case concerning the minority status of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). In a 4:3 majority decision, the apex court overturned a 1967 judgement that had denied AMU the recognition of a minority institution. This crucial decision sets the stage for a fresh examination of AMU’s status under Article 30 of the Constitution, which grants the right to religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions within India.
The case, which was heard by a seven-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, centered around the question of whether AMU qualifies as a minority institution. The 1967 ruling in the case of S Azeez Basha V Union of India had concluded that AMU was not a minority institution, citing the AMU Act, 1920, which established the university. The court argued that the Act did not establish or administer the university by the Muslim community, a condition stipulated for minority educational institutions under Article 30 (1) of the Constitution.
However, the current bench has taken a different stance. The court’s decision to overturn the 1967 ruling hinges on the need to reassess the ‘establishment’ aspect of AMU’s status. This crucial determination has now been entrusted to a three-judge bench, which will re-evaluate the university’s origins to decide if it was indeed established by a minority community.
The court’s decision has been met with mixed reactions. While some view it as a positive step towards ensuring the rights of minorities, others raise concerns about the potential implications for other institutions. The outcome of this re-examination will have a lasting impact on AMU’s future and its standing within the Indian education system.
It is worth noting that the bench’s decision was not unanimous. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud authored the majority opinion, while Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and SC Sharma dissented. The implications of this landmark decision are far-reaching, and the legal community awaits the findings of the three-judge bench with great anticipation.
