In a latest development, the seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court has commenced hearings on a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the 1968 verdict that stripped Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) of its minority status. The decision by a five-judge bench in 1968 had asserted that AMU neither met the criteria of being established nor administered by the Muslim minority. The present hearings, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, delve into the complex issue of minority rights and the character of educational institutions.

During the extensive day-long hearing, Senior Advocate Rajiv Dhavan, representing AMU, emphasized the institution's commitment to being a secular educational entity. Chief Justice Chandrachud noted that AMU need not limit itself to administering only religious courses and suggested that it could function as a secular institution while adhering to the right of establishment and administration. Dhavan supported this stance, highlighting that AMU admits students from various communities and aspires to be a beacon of excellence without becoming a communal institution.

Dhavan invoked Article 30(1) of the Constitution, which grants linguistic and religious minorities the fundamental right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. He referred to the 1968 Azeez Basha vs Union of India case, where a five-judge Constitutional Bench linked the terms "established" and "administered" in Article 30(1), requiring fulfillment of both conditions for an institution to enjoy minority status.

The legal battle surrounding AMU's minority status dates back to 1968 when the original verdict questioned the institution's credentials as a minority establishment. In 1981, the Supreme Court raised doubts about the 1968 judgment and referred the matter to a seven-judge bench. Subsequently, an amendment to the AMU Act reinstated the minority status, but it faced constitutional challenges in the Allahabad High Court, leading to the current hearings before the Supreme Court.

The ongoing legal proceedings raise crucial questions about the parameters for granting minority status under Article 30 and whether a centrally-funded university, established by parliamentary statute, can be designated as a minority institution. The intricate debate involves balancing the rights of linguistic and religious minorities with the broader principles of educational excellence and non-discrimination.

As the Supreme Court hearings remain inconclusive today, the case will continue on Wednesday.

Case: Aligarh Muslim University Through its Registrar Faizan Mustafa vs. Naresh Agarwal and Ors.

Civil Appeal No.2286/2006.

Click to read/download order.