Mere presence of office-bearers from majority community in educational institutions do not dilute their minority character: SC

A Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud observed that the mere presence of office-bearers from a majority community in some wings of the administration of educational institutions do not dilute their minority character.

A Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud on Wednesday observed that the mere presence of office-bearers from a majority community in some wings of the administration of educational institutions do not dilute their minority character.

“The mere fact that some part of the administration is also looked after by non-minority officials who have a representative voice by virtue of their service in the institution or their association or engagement with the institution will not in that sense dilute the minority character of the institution,” the seven-judge Bench noted.

The Bench is hearing a series of petitions related to the minority status of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). A five-judge Bench, in S. Azeez Basha versus Union of India case in 1967, had held that the AMU was a Central university and cannot be considered a minority institution.

The university, established in 1875, had got its minority status back when the Parliament enacted the AMU (Amendment) Act in 1981. In January 2006, the Allahabad High Court, however, struck down the provision of the 1981 law by which the university was accorded the minority status. The issue was referred to a seven-judge Bench in 2019.

In its written submissions, the Centre has contended that the AMU cannot be considered a minority institution given its “national character”. The government said the AMU was not and cannot be a university of any particular religion or religious denomination. It said a university declared as an institution of national importance cannot be a minority institution.

The university had contended that it was established by the Muslim community for educating and empowering the community.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the AMU, said the university had a right to challenge if there was any undue interference in its functioning.