NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court will on Tuesday examine whether its 1967 verdict by a five-judge bench stripping Aligarh Muslim University of its minority status was correct even as AMU cited historical facts, its emblem, educational curriculum, and appointment of muezzins (the person who makes the call to prayer) to attempt get back ‘minority institution status’ despite coming under UGC Act.
In 1967, a five-judge Constitution bench in S Azeez Basha vs Union of India had ruled that AMU “was neither established nor administered by Muslim minority”, and consequently, held that it can’t enjoy protection for minorities to administer educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution.
On November 26, 1981, a two-judge bench of the SC in Anjuman-e-Rahmania vs District Inspector of Schools questioned the correctness of the Azeez Basha ruling and referred the matter to a seven-judge bench.
While the matter was pending consideration of a seven-judge bench, petitions were filed before Allahabad HC challenging AMU’s decision to reserve seats for Muslims in postgraduate courses. The HC on January 5, 2006, declared that AMU was never a minority institution, and that reservations for Muslim minority in postgraduate courses was declared as unconstitutional and impermissible.
In addition, the HC struck down three important changes introduced through the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981. A batch of eight petitions, including one by the Union government, challenged the correctness of the HC verdict in the SC. The Centre, during the UPA government’s tenure, had supported the minority status for AMU. The NDA government in 2016 withdrew its appeal from the SC and said AMU was not a minority institution.
Though the controversy arose 57 years ago with the Azeez Basha case ruling and was referred to the seven-judge bench for reconsideration nearly 43 years ago, the issue remains unresolved. A seven-judge bench comprising CJI Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, J B Pardiwala, Dipankar Datta, manoj Misra and Satish Sharma is scheduled to commence on Tuesday proceedings on eight petitions in addition to the referred questions.
AMU, in its written submissions, finalised by senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, cited the historical facts including transformation of Mohammedan Anglo Oriental College into AMU and the architecture of the building – use of a deep green colour, domes, Quranic inscriptions – to buttress its argument about the Islamic character of the university.
The emblem of AMU contains a Quranic verse which is also its motto; has a university mosque; employs muezzins; has separate departments of studies for Sunni theology, Shea theology, Islamic studies, Arabic language and literature, Persian and Urdu, Islamic philosophy and Quranic studies – are the other characteristics which AMU cited to get back minority status. “AMU made accommodations for female students to observe purdah,” the AMU said.
In 1967, a five-judge Constitution bench in S Azeez Basha vs Union of India had ruled that AMU “was neither established nor administered by Muslim minority”, and consequently, held that it can’t enjoy protection for minorities to administer educational institutions under Article 30(1) of the Constitution.
On November 26, 1981, a two-judge bench of the SC in Anjuman-e-Rahmania vs District Inspector of Schools questioned the correctness of the Azeez Basha ruling and referred the matter to a seven-judge bench.
While the matter was pending consideration of a seven-judge bench, petitions were filed before Allahabad HC challenging AMU’s decision to reserve seats for Muslims in postgraduate courses. The HC on January 5, 2006, declared that AMU was never a minority institution, and that reservations for Muslim minority in postgraduate courses was declared as unconstitutional and impermissible.
In addition, the HC struck down three important changes introduced through the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981. A batch of eight petitions, including one by the Union government, challenged the correctness of the HC verdict in the SC. The Centre, during the UPA government’s tenure, had supported the minority status for AMU. The NDA government in 2016 withdrew its appeal from the SC and said AMU was not a minority institution.
Though the controversy arose 57 years ago with the Azeez Basha case ruling and was referred to the seven-judge bench for reconsideration nearly 43 years ago, the issue remains unresolved. A seven-judge bench comprising CJI Chandrachud, and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Surya Kant, J B Pardiwala, Dipankar Datta, manoj Misra and Satish Sharma is scheduled to commence on Tuesday proceedings on eight petitions in addition to the referred questions.
AMU, in its written submissions, finalised by senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, cited the historical facts including transformation of Mohammedan Anglo Oriental College into AMU and the architecture of the building – use of a deep green colour, domes, Quranic inscriptions – to buttress its argument about the Islamic character of the university.
The emblem of AMU contains a Quranic verse which is also its motto; has a university mosque; employs muezzins; has separate departments of studies for Sunni theology, Shea theology, Islamic studies, Arabic language and literature, Persian and Urdu, Islamic philosophy and Quranic studies – are the other characteristics which AMU cited to get back minority status. “AMU made accommodations for female students to observe purdah,” the AMU said.