SC’s divided verdict

THE Supreme Court’s decision to revisit Aligarh Muslim University's (AMU) minority status marks a pivotal moment in the discourse on minority rights within India’s education system. By a narrow 4-3 majority, the court on Friday overturned the 1967 S Azeez Basha vs Union of India ruling, which had denied AMU’s minority status on the grounds of its establishment by statute. The majority, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, argued that the focus should be on AMU’s origins rather than its formal incorporation. Dissenting Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma, however, countered that genuine minority institutions should retain administrative control.

Established by the Muslim community in 1875 and later formalised under British-era legislation in 1920, AMU’s founding intent is central to this re-evaluation. Under this interpretation, AMU’s identity is tied to its origins, even if it is now subject to government oversight. This perspective also asserts that minority institutions need not be exclusively controlled by members of their founding community, nor must they solely serve that community to retain their minority status.

The SC ruling has deferred the final decision on AMU’s status to a three-judge Bench. This rekindles the possibility for AMU to reserve seats for Muslim students, which could strengthen its mission to serve the community. The decision assumes significance as it comes amid broader conversations about minority rights, autonomy and the balancing act between government regulation and community-led education. The court’s nuanced stance recognises that education rights for minorities are essential for fostering diversity within India’s academic landscape. A favourable verdict may set a precedent, not only for AMU but also for other institutions seeking minority status, potentially reshaping the country’s approach to minority rights in education.