The Supreme Court questioned the significance of Aligarh Muslim University’s (AMU) minority status, emphasizing that its status as an institute of national importance prevails even without the minority tag. On Thursday, the court deliberated the issue, highlighting that the intent of Article 30 of the Constitution is not to “ghettoize the minority.”
Article 30 deals with the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. The court, examining the debated minority status of AMU, also considered the impact on the 2006 Allahabad High Court verdict that struck down the provision granting the university minority status.
The court observed that the absence of the minority tag does not diminish AMU’s national importance, stating that the concern is primarily the brand name—AMU. The ongoing dispute stems from the 1967 S Azeez Basha versus Union of India case, where the court held that as a central university, AMU cannot be considered a minority institution.
During the hearing, the court noted that the counsel for AMU had undertaken not to implement 50% reservation for Muslims in admissions. The Solicitor General highlighted that minority educational institutions are not obligated to follow the reservation policy.
While discussing the importance of AMU’s minority status for women’s education, the court acknowledged that the existence of minority status is relevant. However, it emphasized that the object of Article 30 is not to segregate the minority and clarified that it doesn’t mandate that only the minority community should administer the institution.
The arguments continued, with the court contemplating the impact of overturning the S Azeez Basha case, acknowledging its potential influence on both the amendment and the high court verdict. The court concluded that the arguments would resume on January 23.
Source: PTI
Also read: AMU VC’s wife shortlisted as one of three final candidates for the post
