SC ruling on AMU affirms minority status of institutions: St Stephen’s, Jamia officials

“The judgment definitely affirms the minority status of institutions, both established and administered,” St Stephen’s chairman Rt Rev Dr Paul Swarup told The Indian Express.

Hailing the ruling, he hoped it would bring a “positive change” in the long-standing dispute with the Delhi University (DU) over the college’s authority in appointing the principal. “…And (on the matter) for re-appointment after five years, the university is still not approving it saying the nominee of the Vice-Chancellor and the nominee of the University are the ones who have to approve it. That is taking away our minority rights,” he said.

St Stephen’s College, designated a minority institution, is currently in a legal tussle with DU over the term renewal process of its principal, John Varghese, who was reappointed in 2021 after his first five-year tenure.

Jamia Milia Islamia

Swarup said that the principal’s appointment is part of the administering process that maintains an institute’s minority values. “In Stephen’s College, the Supreme Council is the appointing authority. So the re-appointing authority cannot be the university… That is the issue which is ongoing in the court. We challenged it in court and it is continuing,” he said, observing that the Supreme Court’s ruling affirms minority institutions’ administrative autonomy, which includes selecting leadership.

According to the college, DU’s insistence on either an external review committee or a fresh advertisement for the position violates their rights under Article 30 of the Constitution that grants minority institutions the freedom to manage their affairs.

The top court’s ruling also reignited conversations around the minority status of Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI). In 2018, in a revised affidavit filed in the Delhi High Court, the BJP-led government reversed its earlier stance and opposed an order by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions (NCMEI) that had recognised JMI as a minority institution, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in the Azeez Basha Vs Union of India case of 1967. It stated that the first affidavit did not take note of the Azeez Basha case, in which the apex court said that a university incorporated under an Act of Parliament cannot claim the status of a minority institution.

In response to the SC ruling, JMI’s standing counsel Pritish Sabharwal noted that “the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in [the Vijay Kumar Sharma case] has stated that certain issues at Jamia are interlinked with AMU and the Azeez Basha case”. He said the outcome of the Supreme Court’s impending review of AMU’s status will significantly impact Jamia’s case, as both hinges on similar legal principles regarding minority status.

Although JMI’s spokesperson Ahmed Azeem declined to comment, sources told The Indian Express, “…one such issue which is interrelated with Azeez Basha is… once a university is created by the Parliament Act, whether that institute can be declared as a minority or not… is again the question before the bench that will be constituted… Today’s judgment is in favour of minorities and the minority status will be upheld”.