1.Facts of the case Faizan Mustafa v Naresh Agarwal

• The case of Faizan Mustafa v Naresh Agarwal is about whether Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) may retain the staus to be classified as a Minority Institution.
• In the past of Aligarh Muslim University prior to 1920, the Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental Fund Committee was founded in 1872 and Mohamaddan Anglo Oriental College was founded in the Aligarh district of Uttar Pradesh in 1875 by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.
• In 1877, Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental College was established and connected to both Calcutta University and Allahabad University.The Muslim University Foundation committee, together with the Anglo Oriental College group, attempted to establish a Muslim university before the Muslim University Association was founded in 1911.[1]
• In the case of Azeez Basha v. Union of India, the Supreme Court ruled that the AMU Act 1981 was unconstitutional and that Aligarh Muslim University was not a minority institution because it was founded by the British Parliament Act 1920 as it was not founded by members of the minority community, it could not be considered a minority institution for the purposes of Article 30 of the Indian Constitution.

2.The Aligarh Muslim University, Act, 1920

In order to combine the MAO College and another Muslim University Association into a single university known as the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), the Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920 (AMU Act) was passed on September 14, 1920.The court was established by Section 23 of the Act, and its membership was restricted to only Muslims and only they may serve on the Court of the University, the university's governing body. , as stated in the proviso to Section 23(1).Additionally, the court was to be the University's ultimate governing body under section 23(2), exercising all University powers not otherwise granted by the 1920 Act, Statutes, Ordinances, and Regulations[2].According to Article 30 of Indian Constitution,Every minority group regardless of religion or language, will have the freedom to create and run any kind of school they choose.The nation's conscience, expressed in article 30(1) of the constitution"(1A) The State shall ensure that any amount fixed by or determined under such law for the acquisition of such property is such as would not restrict or abrogate the right guaranteed under that clause when making any law providing for the compulsory acquisition of any property of an educational institution established and administered by a minority, as mentioned in clause (1)."[3], is the true justification for allowing minorities, both linguistic and religious, to found and run educational institutions of their choosing in order to provide the best education possible for their children. This right is granted to them in order to protect and strengthen the nation's integrity and unity as well as to guarantee equality with the majority. It is not meant to give minorities an unfair advantage over the majority and there is no reverse discrimination in favor of minorities.[4]

3.The Amendment Act in 1951 and 1965

The Aligarh Muslim University(AMU Act) was changed in 1951 to remove the requirement that Muslim students attend mandatory religious instruction.It also eliminated the clause requiring solely Muslim representation in the University Court from the 1920 Act.The University will accept students of any gender and from any race, creed, caste, or class. It will also not be permitted for the University to implement or enforce any kind of test on students based on their profession or religious beliefs.Nothing in this section will be construed to prohibit religious education from being provided in the way specified, according to the proviso to section 8. Since AMU began offering compulsory religious instruction, the policy had to be changed to avoid conflicting with article 28(3)and Section 9 was added, which states that no student attending a state-recognized educational institution or may be forced to participate or attend the religious services held there or on property without their consent.[5]

The Act was later revised in 1965. The Court was no longer the AMU's highest governing authority. It evolved into a body whose members were proposed by the Visitor, who was the Indian President. To democratize management, the powers were divided among other university authorities, such as the Executive.A.M.U. increased external reservations in 1965 by reducing institutional or internal reservations from 75% to 50%, which sparked debate.The decrease in internal reservations sparked widespread unrest and protests on campus, disrupting the tranquility.Following an attack on Vice-Chancellor Ali Yavar Jung, the administration amended the A.M.U. Act because they believed the situation was out of control.The 1965 amendment made significant revisions to Section 23, which contained the rules governing the makeup and authority of the university court.[6]

4.'Minority' Status AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981

. There have been two changes in conditions since the 1967 ruling.Firstly, Parliament changed the Preamble's language by removing the word "establish" and adding the following definition of "university" in Sub-section 2(1).The Act was changed in 1981 to define "university" as a school "founded by the Muslims of India," which was subsequently changed toAligarh Muslim University( AMU) from Mohamaddan Anglo Oriental College( MAO) College This was done by the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981.2(1) "University" refers to the educational establishment of their choice founded by Muslims in India; the Aligarh Muslim University was subsequently incorporated from Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College Aligarh, which was its original name[7].A new provision supporting the advancement of the "Muslims of India" in terms of education and culture was added to the University's powers under Section 5.However, the amending Act said nothing about whether the AMU, which was initially founded by Muslims, was also run by the Muslim community.

5.The Recent Jinah Controversy at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU)

Recently police allegedly used tear gas and caned students during their march to file a police complaint against Hindu groups that had broken into the campus to object to the presence of a portrait of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the father of Pakistan at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) have gone on a sit-in protest.The Muslim League's demand for Pakistan was a blatant renunciation of its duty to defend Muslim interests in the provinces where they were the minority, which had been the League's original purpose. This distorting of the party's goal was Jinnah's fault. Jinnah promoted the creation of a distinct Muslim state made up of the regions with a majority of Muslims where Muslims did not require protection. Jinnah took satisfaction in being the only representative of all Muslims in India.[8]

6.Conclusion

This controversy shows about how since the Supreme court did not over turn the Allahabad High Court's ruling which invalidated the reservation policy and ruled that AMU was not a minority university and could not have an exclusive quota. In Dr. Naresh Agarwal v. Union of India (2005), this was contested. S. Azeez Basha was cited by the petitioners in their defense of AMU's non-minority status. The University and the Union argued that the 1981 amendment rendered S. Azeez Basha invalid[9].Since Aligarh Muslim University is still not considered as a minority institution, you can be denied the right to SC, ST, and OBC because the Supreme Court did not overturn the Allahabad High Court's ruling leadond to violation of their rights.

Citations

1.Reservation Policy and Aligarh Muslim University: What are the Facts? What the Law says?,available at https://vsktelangana.org/what-are-the-facts-what-the-law-says-about-aligarh-muslim-university (December 25,2023)

2.AMU Minority Status,avaialble at https://www.scobserver.in/cases/aligarh-muslim-university-naresh-agarwal-amu-minority-status-case-background/ (December 25,2023)

3. Constitutional Provision,available at https://www.education.gov.in/fundamental_rights_article-30

4.Shah Rukh Ahmad;"THE MINORITY STATUS OF ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY",available at https://ili.ac.in/pdf/paper717.pdf (December 25,2023)

5.Supra note 4

6.Supra note 4

7.Shamim Akthar;"CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS FOR MINORITY INSTITUTIONS AND THE CASE OF ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY: THE LEGAL SEARCH FOR A SOLUTION SINCE 1965",aailable at https://www.jstor.org/stable/44158906 (December 25,2023)

8.Mohammed Ayoob;Remove Jinnahs portrait, available at https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/remove-jinnahs-portrait/article23815917.ece (December 25,2023)

9.Supra note 2