AMU Surrendered Rights To British, Argues Centre; Political Inclination Of Founders Immaterial For Minority Status, Says Supreme Court [Day 4]

During the second half of the fourth day of the hearing of the case relating to the minority status of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), Solicitor General of India (SG) Mr Tushar Mehta made submissions on the historical aspects of the AMU Act of 1920 and emphasized the context in which the University came into existence. In one such submission, he argued that while AMU was a pre-constitution institution recognised under the Imperial legislation, there did exist other institutions at the same time which were not recognised under the British Crown. These included Osmania University, Bihar University, Kashi Vidhyalaya, Scottish College, St Stephen's etc.He submitted, “They were institutions in the British time which had the reputation, granted degrees except they were not under the British crown” Referring to his written submissions, he explained how the founders of the AMU were considered 'loyalists' to the Imperial regime. SG said that there was a breakaway group who were opposed to the loyalist stand of AMU and the nationalists started the Jamia Milia Islamia. Sr Advocate Mr Rakesh Dwivedi interjected to add that the book 'The Loyal Musalman' written by the founder of AMU, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan shows that the "whole purpose of this MAO(Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College, which later became the AMU) was to create an educated class of Muslims who are loyal subjects".The CJI however, observed that the political inclination of the founders during the British Raj could not deprive AMU of its minority status. The CJI opined, “The fact that the loyalists were in alignment with the views of the Imperial power doesn't make it any less an institution founded by a minority. Founded by the minority does not mean that you have to be in opposition to the govt. Therefore to say there were two factions - the loyalist or nationalist movement does not have bearing that it seizes to be a minority institution. We are just saying that this hypothesis is equally consistent with the fact that a minority institution may or may not be politically inclined towards the govt.” The CJI further remarked that books being a secondary source of evidence, the Court has to be careful while dealing with underlining materials in a book. “We are just making a small caveat as far as the books are concerned”. To which the SG clarified that through his submissions he draws that the founders of AMU surrendered their minority rights to the Imperial Regime while other institutions did not. The discussion went as follows : SG : That's not my case, I'm just trying to show how historically you surrendered while others did not. Others also had the option of surrendering their rights as a denominational institution .....but they continued their existence de hors the govt. You could have stuck to your ground. Vishwa Bharati stuck to its ground.At this point, the CJI asked if the universities like Vishwa Bharati awarded degrees which were not recognized by the British crown. The SG replied in the affirmative and said that the degrees were recognized post-independence after the enactment of the UGC Act.The point emphasised by the SG was that AMU 'surrendered' its rights to the British crown and hence cannot claim minority rights. He explained that this was the ratio of the 1967 Azeez Basha judgment, which declared that AMU was not a minority institution. The petitioners have urged the present bench to revisit Azeez Basha."My intention was not that because they sided with British don't trust. They had every right to take their own political stand, maybe that was the beneficial stand for the students etc," the SG added clarifying that he was merely explaining the ratio of Azeez Basha.AMU Though Founded By Minorities Could Still Be Of Secular Form - The CJI Highlights On the aspect of Article 30 and its application in light of the secular administration of AMU, the CJI remarked upon the written notes of the SG. To suggest that AMU lacked minority character because the intention of the founder Sir Syed was to set up an entirely secular educational institution is 'fundamentally inconsistent with the principles underlying Article 30”, the CJI said.“A minority institution may set up a purely secular form of institution. Then you said that the minority element was a small portion of the larger idea of Sir Syed, this cannot be a correct constitutional test to apply” The SG countered this by explaining that the issue at hand is that Article 30 could not be the basis of testing the pre-constitution establishment. “The difficulty is that we are testing something that happened in 1920 based on Article 30, which was not there at that time.”The CJI said that the issue is whether the University acquired a minority status after the adoption of the Constitution.Funding And Administration Of AMU Controlled By The British Crown - Contends SG Tushar Mehta The SG stressed that the historical facts and the context in which AMU was created have to be seen holistically,...

AMU Surrendered Rights To British, Argues Centre; Political Inclination Of Founders Immaterial For Minority Status, Says Supreme Court [Day 4]

Anmol Kaur Bawa

Tags