[ad_1]
The Supreme Court will today examine whether its 1967 verdict by a five-judge bench stripping Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) of its minority status was correct.
The University has cited historical facts, its emblem, educational curriculum, and appointment of muezzins in an attempt to get back the ‘minority institution’ status despite coming under the UGC Act.
The verdict in question
In 1967, a five-judge Constitution bench in S Azeez Basha vs Union of India case ruled that AMU “was neither established nor administered by Muslim minority”.
It held that it can’t enjoy protection for minorities to administer educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution.
However, on November 26, 1981, a two-judge SC bench in the Anjuman-e-Rahmania vs District Inspector of Schools case questioned the correctness of the Azeez Basha ruling and referred the matter to a seven-judge bench.
Now, a seven-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud will hear the matter today.
Also…
While the matter was pending consideration of a seven-judge bench, petitions were filed before Allahabad High Court challenging AMU’s decision to reserve seats for Muslims in post-graduate courses.
The Allahabad High Court on January 5, 2006, declared that AMU was never a minority institution, and that reservation for Muslims in postgraduate courses was declared as unconstitutional and impermissible.
A political matter
The Centre, during the UPA government’s tenure, had supported the minority status of AMU.
The NDA government in 2016 withdrew the UPA’s affidavit saying AMU was not a minority institution under the UGC Act.
Article 30 of the Constitution says that all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
Minority institutions can make seat reservations for admission based on religion and they are entitled to certain funds from the government.
The University has cited historical facts, its emblem, educational curriculum, and appointment of muezzins in an attempt to get back the ‘minority institution’ status despite coming under the UGC Act.
The verdict in question
In 1967, a five-judge Constitution bench in S Azeez Basha vs Union of India case ruled that AMU “was neither established nor administered by Muslim minority”.
It held that it can’t enjoy protection for minorities to administer educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution.
However, on November 26, 1981, a two-judge SC bench in the Anjuman-e-Rahmania vs District Inspector of Schools case questioned the correctness of the Azeez Basha ruling and referred the matter to a seven-judge bench.
Now, a seven-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud will hear the matter today.
Also…
While the matter was pending consideration of a seven-judge bench, petitions were filed before Allahabad High Court challenging AMU’s decision to reserve seats for Muslims in post-graduate courses.
The Allahabad High Court on January 5, 2006, declared that AMU was never a minority institution, and that reservation for Muslims in postgraduate courses was declared as unconstitutional and impermissible.
A political matter
The Centre, during the UPA government’s tenure, had supported the minority status of AMU.
The NDA government in 2016 withdrew the UPA’s affidavit saying AMU was not a minority institution under the UGC Act.
Article 30 of the Constitution says that all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
Minority institutions can make seat reservations for admission based on religion and they are entitled to certain funds from the government.
[ad_2]
Source link