On His Last Day In SC, CJI Chandrachud-Led Bench Paves Way For AMU Minority Status

A seven-judge Supreme Court bench is is reading out the order over the minortity status of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) as per Article 30.

CJI Chandrachud said that the minority status of the AMU as per Article 30 will be delivered by a three-judge bench later.

Source : PTI

The Supreme Court of India on Friday announced its verdict on whether the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) enjoys minority status under Article 30 of the Constitution or not. Article 30 empowers religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. In the key judgment the Supreme Court overruled its 1967 decision, which held that Aligarh Muslim University can't claim minority status as it was created by a statute.

However, the final judgment on whether AMU would enjoy 'minority' status will be decided by a regular bench. This three-judge bench will determine whether it was 'established' by a minority. While AMU does not have a reservation policy according to the state, its internal policy reserves 50% of the seats for students passing from its affiliated schools or colleges. 

Notably, it's Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud's last working day at the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud was quoted as saying by legal news website Bar and Bench: "The Solicitor General has stated the union is not pressing the preliminary objection that a reference cannot be made to seven judges. It cannot be disputed that Article 30 guarantees minorities to not be discriminated against. The question is does it have a special right along with the right to non-discrimination." He further said: "The right granted by Article 30 is not absolute... Thus, the regulation of minority institutions is protected under Article 19(6).

He further said that there were 4 opinions. "I have authored the majority. There are three dissents. Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sharma have written their own dissents. So it is 4:3.

The Bench said that a religious community may establish an institution but may not administer it.

Describing the reasoning for the verdict, CJI said: "We have held that to be a minority institution it only had to be established by the minority and not necessarily be administered by the minority members. Minority institutions may wish to emphasise secular education and for that minority members are not needed in administration."