Following discussions with the State Governments and other stakeholders regarding the issue of "identification and notification of religious and linguistic minorities" based on the top court's earlier order, the Central Government has submitted its Status Report to the Supreme Court of India in a batch of petitions seeking district-wise identification of minorities.

The supreme court had earlier in May 2022 ordered the federal government to discuss with the states regarding the issue of the identification of minorities.

The Central Government's response states that, "Based on the above order, the Central government held consultative meetings with all the State Governments/Union Territories including other stakeholders such as the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, Ministry of Education, National Commission for Women and National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions."

The response further notes that while 6 UTs and 24 state governments have given their thoughts, they have yet to hear back from 6 of them despite repeated requests. Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Lakshwadeep, Rajasthan, Telangana, and Jharkhand are the States/UTs that haven't responded.

In response, the Ministry of Home Affairs stated that it was unable to speak further on the subject. However, it also adds that, “the issue of the authority of the Parliament or the State Legislature to exclusively legislate on matters pertaining to minority communities is to be examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice”.

Ministry of Education's response states that, “As per the judgment of the Hon’ble SC in TMA Pai Foundation, the identification of minorities at the district level is not legal because linguistic or religious minority is determinable only by reference to demography of the state because it differs from place to place.”

According to the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions, "identification of minorities at the district level is not legal because linguistic or religious minority is determinable only by reference to demography of the state because it differs from place to place".

West Bengal and Punjab states take the stance that the state government should have the authority to recognise and inform linguistic and religious minorities.

Jains were designated as a minority in Punjab in April 2013, according to the Punjab State Commission for Minorities Act of 2012. That was stated “in India, different communities are in majority or minority in different provinces/states…. Keeping in view the above as well as the peculiar geographical and social scenario of the state of Punjab, only the state government is in the position to better appreciate the interests, well being and problems of different sections/communities residing in the state. It is important that the state continues to do so in order to provide protection to minorities and safeguard their interests”.

For the purposes of identifying and notifying religious and linguistic minorities, the states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Assam, Manipur, and Sikkim have particularly declared in their responses that the state should be viewed as a unit rather than the nation.

However, Tamil Nadu added that “even if the unit is considered to be the state, religious minorities status cannot be conferred merely based on the population in a particular state but it should also take into account factors such as the actual or probable deprivation of the religious, cultural and educational rights and their socioeconomic status…”.

While supporting the state as the decisive factor for religious minorities, Manipur also said “any religious group which constitutes less than 50% of the state's population should be recognised as a religious minority group of the state”.

Ten states, including Nagaland, Bihar, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, and Madhya Pradesh, chose the status quo.

Odisha disagreed with the petitioner's request to omit any of the six recognised minorities from the list or to designate any other group as a minority (the petitioners also seek declaration of Hindus as minorities in certain states).

The National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act's current Section 2(f) may be kept in its current form, according to Chhattisgarh (this provision is also under challenge in the petitions).

According to the States of Maharashtra and Haryana, the Central Government may inform minorities. The six communities were designated as religious minorities by Maharashtra, while those whose native tongue is not Marathi are regarded as linguistic minorities.

The state of Uttar Pradesh stated that it would not oppose if the federal government decided to act in this regard.

Meghalaya stated that it has nothing further to add. In response, the Union Territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, Chandigarh, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, and J&K&L said they will obey the Central Government's instructions in this subject.

Himachal Pradesh is the only state that have officially stated that the nation must be viewed as a unit. Himachal Pradesh claimed that the 1992 Central Government notification designating six communities as minorities was still in effect "adequately meet the Constitutional Standards".

State of Mizoram responded by claiming that since the issue of minorities' reservations falls under the Concurrent List, both the State Government and the Central Government have the authority/power to enact laws on the matter. The State of Mizoram also claimed that since this is a matter of policy, it should be left up to the two governments to decide.

The Delhi government's response is particularly intriguing in that it indicates that it has no issues with the Central Government designating Buddhists and Jews as minorities. Additionally, it says that "the Central Government may declare 'migrated minority' status to the followers of Hinduism who are religious minority in their origin state (i.e. Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, etc.) and are residing in Delhi after migration from their home state"  

Puducherry has responded by claiming that the Writ Petition's requests have no bearing on the Union Territory.

The Centre stated that it is awaiting views from 6 States/UTs, namely Telangana, J&K, Jharkhand, Lakshadweep, Rajasthan, and Arunachal Pradesh.

In order to ensure that only those religious and linguistic groups that are socially, economically, politically, and numerically very inferior receive the benefits and protections guaranteed under Articles 29 and 30, the petitioners ask the Union Government to define the term "minority" and establish "guidelines for identification of minorities at district level."

Case Title : Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay versus Union of India 
Citation: WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 836 OF 2020