The legislative move by Ramji Lal Suman aims to challenge controversial court rulings on the minority status of the prestigious institution
Mohammad Alamullah | Clarion India
NEW DELHI — In a significant development, senior Rajya Sabha member and former Union Minister Ramji Lal Suman of the Samajwadi Party on Tuesday introduced a private member’s bill aimed at restoring the minority status of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). The bill seeks to overturn a series of legal judgments and government decisions that have adversely affected the university’s recognition as a minority institution.
The history of AMU’s minority status has been fraught with challenges. Initially granted minority status through a parliamentary amendment in December 1981, this recognition was revoked by the Allahabad High Court in 2005. The court based its decision on a Supreme Court ruling from 1967, which declared that AMU did not qualify as a minority institution because it was established under British legislation via the Aligarh Muslim University Act of 1920.
Founded by Muslim community leaders who collectively raised ₹30 lakhs to establish the institution, AMU has served as a vital educational hub for Muslims in India. The revocation of its minority status has sparked significant debate regarding the rights of religious minorities in the country, particularly concerning access to education.
The 2005 Allahabad High Court ruling led to critical changes in AMU’s admission policies. The university previously reserved 50% of seats for Muslim students in its postgraduate medical courses, a decision that faced legal challenges culminating in the case of Dr Naresh Agarwal v. Union of India (2005). The Allahabad High Court struck down this reservation policy, prompting AMU and the central government to appeal to the Supreme Court in 2006. However, under the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the appeal initiated by the previous United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government was withdrawn in 2014.
Despite these obstacles, AMU and several affiliated organisations have continued to contest earlier judgments in the Supreme Court. In a pivotal moment in 2019, a three-judge bench referred the matter to a larger seven-judge bench for reconsideration, highlighting the issue’s importance within the broader framework of minority rights in India.
On October 12 last year, Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud established a seven-judge bench to hear the case regarding AMU’s minority status. Proceedings commenced on January 9, 2024, and after an intensive eight-day hearing, the Supreme Court reserved its verdict on February 1, 2024. The decision is crucial as it will determine whether AMU qualifies for recognition as a minority institution under Article 30 of the Indian Constitution.
Article 30 grants religious minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. The Supreme Court’s ruling will not only affect AMU but also set a significant precedent for minority rights and educational access in India.
Suman’s private member’s bill goes beyond a mere legislative proposal; it embodies the aspirations of a community seeking recognition and support amid changing political dynamics. The BJP government has previously resisted AMU’s claims to minority status, framing the discourse within broader policies impacting religious minorities in the country.
In introducing the bill, Suman has invoked promises made by the Janata Party in its election manifesto, which explicitly committed to restoring AMU’s status as a minority institution. He stated, “The minority status of AMU is not just a legal issue; it is a matter of the community’s rights and recognition.” This political backing is essential, particularly in the context of the socio-political landscape affecting educational policies concerning minorities.
The Supreme Court’s deliberations hold considerable weight, especially with the impending retirement of Chief Justice Chandrachud. Observers speculate that he may expedite the delivery of the verdict on this contentious issue. The case raises fundamental questions about the rights of minorities to self-govern their educational institutions and the implications of governmental oversight.
As the judiciary navigates the complexities surrounding AMU’s status, it revisits the landmark 1967 Constitution Bench judgment in Aziz Basha v. Union of India, which concluded that AMU did not possess minority status due to its establishment under British law.
The forthcoming verdict from the Supreme Court could redefine the legal status of Aligarh Muslim University and significantly influence future policies regarding minority education in India. Should the court recognise AMU as a minority institution, it could facilitate preferential treatment in admissions and resource allocation, thereby enhancing educational opportunities for Muslim students.
Conversely, a ruling against AMU’s minority status could further marginalise the Muslim community’s access to higher education, raising concerns about equity and representation within India’s educational landscape. As the debate intensifies, the actions of legislators like Ramji Lal Suman and the decisions of the judiciary will be closely scrutinised by various stakeholders.
The introduction of Suman’s private bill to restore AMU’s minority status encapsulates a broader struggle for recognition, rights, and representation for the Muslim community. The outcome of this legislative effort, along with the pending Supreme Court verdict, signifies a crucial moment in the ongoing discourse surrounding minority rights, educational access, and the political climate in the country.
As the nation observes closely, the interplay between legislative initiatives, judicial rulings, and community aspirations will continue to shape the future of educational institutions like AMU and the rights of minorities in the country.