New Delhi. The Supreme Court has overturned its own decision of 1967 which took away the status of minority institution from Aligarh Muslim University i.e. AMU. A seven-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Friday, November 8, ruled by a majority of four-three that no institution can lose the status of being a minority institution merely because it has been created under a Central law. The Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud has set some criteria on the basis of which the new bench of three judges will decide whether AMU is a minority institution or not.
It is noteworthy that in 1967, the Supreme Court had said in the case of Aziz Basha vs. Government of India that an institution formed under central laws cannot claim to be a minority institution. On this basis, the Supreme Court had said that AMU is a central university. It was neither founded nor run by minorities. Overturning this decision, the Supreme Court said on November 8 that an institution cannot lose minority status just because it has been created under a central law.
Along with this, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud directed the new bench of three judges to investigate who established this university and who was the brain behind it. If it comes to light that the minority community was behind this, then AMU can claim minority status under Article 30 (1). After this decision, the lawyers fighting the case of AMU say that the decision has come in their favor because on the criteria set by the Supreme Court, AMU will definitely get the status of a minority institution.
However, after the 1967 decision, AMU’s latest controversy started in 2005, when the university considered itself a minority institution and reserved 50 percent seats in the PG medical course for Muslim students. Hindu students went to Allahabad High Court against this. The High Court did not consider AMU as a minority institution. AMU appealed against this in the Supreme Court. In 2019, the Supreme Court had sent the matter to a constitutional bench of seven judges. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Mishra delivered the majority verdict. Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice SC Sharma wrote the verdict against.
The majority decision said – AMU has been included under the Central Law, it cannot be said only on the basis that it was not established by the minorities. The purpose of Article 30 will not be fulfilled by such an assumption. The court said- To decide who established this institution, the court will have to go to its origin. It has to be found out who was the brain behind this institute. It has to be seen who funded the land and whether the minority community helped. It is not necessary that the institute was established only to help the minority community. It is also not necessary to prove that people from the minority community did its administration.