News Excerpt:

A seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court started hearing the matter pertaining to Aligarh Muslim University’s (AMU) minority character.

Establishment of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU):

• AMU's origins can be traced back to the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College, established by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan in 1875 to help Muslims overcome educational backwardness and prepare for government services.
• MAO College imparted Western education and Islamic theology and advocated for women's education.
• In 1920, the institution was granted university status, and all assets of MOA College were transferred to AMU.

Amendments made in 1951 and 1965 to the AMU Act of 1920:

• Originally, the 1920 Act said that the Governor General of India would be the head of the University.
• In 1951, it was changed to replace “Lord Rector” with “Visitor,” and this Visitor would be the President of India.
• A provision stating that only Muslims could be part of the University Court was removed, allowing non-Muslims to join.
• These amendments reduced the authority of the University Court and increased the powers of the Executive Council of AMU.
• As a result, the University Court essentially became a body appointed by the “Visitor”.

Judicial Interpretation (S. Azeez Basha and another versus Union of India, 1967):

• The amendments in the AMU’s structure faced a legal challenge in the Supreme Court (SC).
• The petitioners argued primarily on the grounds that Muslims established AMU and, therefore, had the right to manage it.
• According to the 1920 Act, the SC stated the university was not solely operated by Muslims.
• Instead, its administration was entrusted to the Lord Rector and other statutory bodies.
• Even the University Court, which had only Muslim members, was elected by an electorate that was not exclusively Muslim.
• The court determined that in 1920, Muslims could have set up a university, but that would not have guaranteed that the Indian government would officially recognise the degrees from that university.
• Hence, the court emphasised AMU was established through a central Act to ensure the government’s recognition of its degrees.
• The Basha judgment had concluded that the varsity was a central university and minority status cannot be conferred on it. 
• Here, the SC held that AMU was neither established nor administered by the Muslim minority. 

Timeline of the dispute:

• In 1981, an amendment to the AMU Act was introduced, affirming its minority status.
• Sections 2(l) and 5(2)(c) stated that the university was an educational institution of their choice established by Muslims of India.
• In 2005, the AMU implemented a reservation policy, allowing 50% of postgraduate medical course seats for Muslim candidates.
• However, the Allahabad High Court overturned the reservation and nullified the 1981 Act.
• The court reasoned that the AMU could not maintain an exclusive reservation because, according to the SC’s verdict in the S. Azeez Basha case, it did not qualify as a minority institution.
• In 2006, eight petitions, including one from the Union government, contested the High Court's decision.
• In 2016, the government informed the SC that it was withdrawing the appeal filed by the government, saying, “As the executive government at the Centre, we can’t be seen as setting up a minority institution in a secular state.”
• In 2019, a three-judge Bench, presided over by CJI Ranjan Gogoi, referred the matter to a seven-judge Bench.

Conclusion:
The SC is considering a reference on questions about the indices for treating an educational institution as a minority educational institution. One of the questions before the Constitution Bench is whether an institution could be regarded as a minority educational institution for the reason that it was “established by a person(s) belonging to a religious or linguistic minority or its being administered by a person(s) belonging to a religious or linguistic minority”.