This article is written by Monesh Mehndiratta and Sushree Surekha Choudhary. The article deals with Article 30 of the Indian Constitution. It explains the objective and importance of the Article and its impact through decided case laws.

This article has been published by Shashwat Kaushik.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Do you agree that education is important for all?

Download Now

Yes, it is indeed important not only for an individual but for the growth and development of the country as well. The importance of this can also be seen in the fact that the right to education has been made a fundamental right in the Indian Constitution. This was also done to impart quality education to poor students who cannot afford the fees of private schools and educational institutions. The Indian Constitution not only guarantees fundamental rights but also recognises the rights of minorities in India. This includes the right to established educational institutions given under Article 30, along with other cultural rights.

India is the largest democracy in the world. It has been known for its diversity since time immemorial. There are minority groups in India following different religions under the secular roof of the nation. Right from the beginning, since the drafting of the Indian Constitution, secularism has been given importance. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution has embedded in it the values of freedom, liberty, integrity, equality, and social justice, making India the secular democratic republic nation that it is. The Constitution of India protects and guarantees rights to every citizen alike, and special provisions have been made throughout the Indian Constitution and also through several other legislations to protect the rights of minorities, backward classes, etc.

Article 29 and Article 30 of the Indian Constitution grant special rights to minorities in India. It guarantees fundamental rights to minorities in India in terms of cultural and educational rights. These rights are absolute in nature and were made with the intent to protect and guarantee freedom and the right to life for these minorities. Article 30 guarantees the right to education to Indian minority communities by giving them the right to establish educational institutions for their communities and run them with the internal administration of their choice. The present article focuses on Article 30 of the Constitution and explains its importance. It also explains other relevant articles in this regard, along with important case laws on the development of such rights.

Historical background behind minorities’ rights in India

Mediaeval India marked the beginning of the formation of minority communities in the country. Muslims, Christians, Anglo-Indians, etc., started forming groups, and this is how the religious communities were recognised in India. India became a home for minorities, and this was furthered by the migrants from different parts of the world who started migrating and residing in India due to religious disturbances in their home state. As they started forming a significant population in the country, the Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru government started making policies for their betterment. He moved a resolution in 1946 in the Constituent Assembly, which was approved in 1947. It was decided to draft policies and safeguard mechanisms for minority communities, backward classes and tribals in India. 

The Constitution Drafting Committee formulated several laws for minorities’ benefits in 1948. Provisions were made under Part XIV of the Indian Constitution under the heading ‘Special Provisions Relating to Minorities’ (Article 292-301). These provisions were later omitted from the final draft, and what remained was articulated under Articles 29 and 30 (Cultural and Educational Rights). The initial drafts also made provisions for reserving seats for minorities in legislative bodies. However, this was not inculcated in the final draft. 

This was criticised as not providing enough protection to the minorities, as they suffered riots, threats, communal violence, a lack of representation in politics and civil services, separatism, and inequality. Thus, making provisions for minorities’ rights and benefits was always essential in a democracy like India. Articles 29 and 30 remained, making several provisions for benefits, protection, and ensuring equality for the minorities of the nation.

Article 30 of the Indian Constitution and its purpose

Article 30 deals with the right of minorities to establish and manage educational institutions in India. According to Article 30(1), the minorities in India have the right to establish educational institutions of their choice and administer them. Such minorities include religious minorities and minorities on the basis of language, i.e., linguistic minorities. The term ‘establish’ used in the article connotes the right to bring an educational institution into existence while administering means to manage the affairs of such an institution. 

In the case of Re, Kerala Education Bill vs. Unknown (1958), the court held that the right given under Article 30 provides the right to minorities to establish educational institutions of their choice for two purposes:

  • To conserve their religion, culture, and language,
  • To provide education to their children according to their choice in their own language.

In the case of D.A.V. College Bhatinda vs. State of Punjab (1971), the court held that the right guaranteed under Article 30(1) of the Constitution includes the right to choose the medium of instructions to be given in the university. Thus, the use of Hindi in university circulars was held to be violative of Article 30(1), and it was declared that Punjabi would be the sole medium of instruction. Another major observation of the court was that the right would be available to institutions established pre and post Constitution. 

According to Article 30(2) of the Constitution, the state is prohibited from discriminating in the grant of aid to any educational institutions only because they are managed and administered by religious and linguistic minorities. In the case of  Bramchari Sidheswar Bhai vs. State of West Bengal (1995), the Supreme Court held that the Ramakrishna Mission established by Swami Vivekananda is not a minority and separate from Hindu religion but its denomination or religious sect. Thus, it cannot claim the right mentioned under Section 30 of the Constitution.

Article 30, as it is read, makes provisions for minority communities in India to establish and administer educational institutions in India. It guarantees them the right to avail themselves of aid from the government, like other educational institutions. Article 30 guarantees them equality and non-discrimination in education. Article 30 also states that, while the compulsory acquisition of land on which a minority educational institution is established must be determined in a way that does not hamper the education rights of the minority community. It facilitates the right to education for minorities in India and upholds the value of the Right to Equality guaranteed to all under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. The right conferred under Article 30 is only guaranteed to minorities in India and not to all citizens alike. This is done with the intent of protecting the interests of the minorities in India. It also gives them the right to impart education in these educational institutions in their own language. 

Minorities’ educational institutions in India are of the following kinds:

  1. Educational institutions that seek approval, recognition, and aid from the state government where they have established their institution,
  2. Educational institutions that seek only approval and recognition from the state government and
  3. Educational institutions that seek neither recognition nor aid from the state government

The administration of these institutions is also varied. Educational institutions that seek recognition, aid, or both from the state government are subject to minimal state interference. These institutions have to follow the directions the state government gives in this regard on matters like manner and standard of academics, syllabus, employment of teachers in these institutions, sanitation standards to be maintained, and other rules and regulations.

On the contrary, educational institutions that do not seek recognition or aid from the state government are free to make their own rules, regulations, and standards of administration without any government interference. They are, however, subject to the reasonable standards and restrictions put in place by the states.

What is common to all three types of minority educational institutions is that all of them are bound to abide by the general laws of the state government and of the nation relating to contract laws, labour laws, taxation laws, etc.

Objectives of Article 30 of the Indian Constitution

Article 30 of the Indian Constitution aims at:

  • Protecting the right to education for minorities.
  • Empowers minorities to establish and manage educational institutions according to their choice.
  • Preserves their cultural and linguistic rights.
  • Help the minorities maintain and protect their dignity and distinct identity among other religions and sections of society.
  • Prohibit any kind of discrimination against the people seeking admission to such educational institutions.

Effect of the 44th Amendment Act, 1978

The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, in the Constitution had a great impact as it abolished the right to property as a fundamental right by abolishing Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution. Apart from this, a significant amendment was made to Article 30 as well. A new clause was inserted as Article 30(1A), which provided that while making any law for the compulsory acquisition of any property of any established educational institution administered by minorities, the state must ensure that the amount fixed for the acquisition of such property is not restricting or abrogating the rights of minorities given under Article 30(1). 

Relation between Article 29 and Article 30 of the Indian Constitution

Article 29 of the Constitution deals with the protection of the interests of minorities and guarantees citizens the right to conserve their language, script, or culture. Article 29(2) further provides that no educational institution, whether maintained by the state or receiving funds from the state, would deny admission to any citizen on the ground of race, religion, caste, or language. The right given under Article 29 can be further exercised by the establishment of educational institutions to preserve and conserve the language, script, and culture of minorities. This is provided by Article 30 of the Constitution, which gives minorities the right to establish and manage educational institutions. However, it must be noted that Article 29 applies only to citizens, while Article 30 applies to citizens and non-citizens both. 

The interrelationship between Article 29 and Article 30 was discussed by the court in the case of Ahmedabad St. Xavier’s College vs. State of Gujarat (1974). The state in this case argued that the right guaranteed under Article 30 was not available to the college as it was not established to conserve the language, culture, or script of the minorities as mentioned under Article 29. The court observed that Article 30 is not restrictive in nature. It does not restrict minorities from establishing educational institutions only for the conservation of language, script, or culture. It was further observed that the right given under Article 29 is a general protection given to the citizens of the country to conserve their language, script, or culture, while the right under Article 30 is a special right available to minorities to establish educational institutions according to their choice.

The court also provided distinction between the two Articles:

  • Article 29 gives rights to any section of citizens residing in India, while Article 30 is available only to minorities. 
  • Article 29 mainly deals with the conservation of language, script, or culture, while Article 30 is available to two kinds of minorities, i.e., religious and linguistic minorities.
  • The right under Article 29 provides for the conservation of language, script, and culture, while the right given in Article 30 provides the right to establish educational institutions.
  • Article 29 does not mention anything about education. Article 30, on the other hand, gives minorities the right to establish and manage educational institutions of their own choice. 

Dual test for the applicability of Article 30 of the Indian Constitution

In Rev. Sidhajbhai Sabhai and Ors. vs. State of Bombay and Anr. (1962), the Supreme Court of India established the dual test criteria. The Court observed that an educational institution will attract the provisions of Article 30 only when it satisfies the dual test criteria. The dual test conditions are:

  1. The educational institution must be regulatory in nature. It must not be destructive of the institution’s nature of being a ‘minority institution.’ 
  2. The institution must be an effective institution for facilitating education for minorities. 

Justice Lalit referred to the In Re: Kerala Education Bill Case (1957), where it was held by the Supreme Court of India that the word ‘choice’ forms an important part of Article 30. This means that every minority community has a choice of establishing, administering, and functioning their educational institution and choosing whether or not to seek recognition and aid from the government.

Justice Lalit also referred to Rev. Father W. Proost and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. (1968), which  struck down Section 48A of the Bihar State Universities Act (1960), which stated that the teachers and employees of the minority educational institution could be appointed, dismissed, removed or reduced in rank without prior approval and permission of the University Service Commission. This was to facilitate the rights of self-administration in minority educational institutions. This judgement was followed by Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973), popularly known as the ‘basic structure doctrine case’, which recognised the rights of minorities as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Minorities in India 

Who can be categorised as minority 

Article 30 of the Constitution talks about only two kinds of minorities, i.e., religious and linguistic minorities. The question of whether a particular community falls under the category of minority has to be decided on the basis of the demographic composition of the state, which means the proportion of their position in the population in different states and not in the whole country. The same question was dealt with by the court in the case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka (2003) along with the question of the procedure for admission in such educational institutions. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that even though the state government cannot regulate the admission policy of educational institutions administered by religious and linguistic minorities if they are not aided by them, it can specify the qualifications for admission of students, the appointment of staff and teachers, and the maintenance of academic standards. 

In order to seek affiliation, such minority institutions have to follow and comply with the conditions laid down by the board or university. The court further emphasised that unaided minority educational institutions must not ignore the merits of the students seeking admission. While admission to minority educational institutions aided by the government has to be regulated by a common entrance exam. 

Classification of minorities

The 2019 UN statistical report suggested that India’s population, at 136.6 crore, was divided into the following percentiles between the majority and minority communities:

  • Hindus formed the majority, owning up to 80.5% of the total population.
  • Muslims make up 13.4% of the total population.
  • Christians make up 2.3% of the total population.
  • Sikhs form 1.9% of the total population.
  • Buddhists cover 0.8% of the total population. 
  • Jains constitute 0.4% of the total population, and 
  • The rest of the communities and classes together form 0.6%.

Thus, statistically, the religious minorities of India comprise Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, and others. The word ‘minority’ is derived from the Latin word ‘minor’ suffixed with ‘ity’ which together means ‘small in number’. Though the Indian Constitution does not anywhere define the word ‘minority’, it is usually determined from statistical data. Article 30 talks about two categories of minorities: religious minorities and linguistic minorities. Religious minorities in India consist of the abovementioned religious communities. Apart from this statistical data, Section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act (1992) declares the following communities as minorities in India perpetually:

  • Muslims,
  • Christians,
  • Sikhs,
  • Buddhists,
  • Jains, and
  • Parsis (Zoroastrians).

Linguistic minorities of a country are those people who speak and whose mother tongue is different from those of the majority group of that country.

This classification of minorities and the classification of minorities’ educational institutions was clarified by the Supreme Court in T.M.A. Pai Foundation and Ors. vs. State of Karnataka and Ors. (2002), where the Supreme Court recited guidelines on Article 29 and Article 30 of the Constitution. The Court clarified that the determination of religious minorities and linguistic minorities is to be done state-wise, not nationally. These minority communities and their educational institutions, therefore, must follow the standard rules, and regulations, and policies of their respective state governments. These rules, regulations, and policies are state-made with the supervision and guidance of the centre. These regulations are made in adherence to the public order, morality, security and sovereignty of the nation.

Importance of protecting minorities 

As the largest democracy in the world and a home for diverse people, it is the primary duty of the Indian government to uphold the values of the Constitution. This includes the protection of the country’s minority communities. It is a general tendency for minorities’ interests to be sidelined due to the importance and privilege enjoyed by the majority community. Thus, to protect the interests of minorities, laws must be made in such a manner that their rights are protected on  par with the majority privileges and rights. This is why special provisions are made for minorities. The Indian laws provide privileges to the majority community. Certain policies have been criticised as being discriminatory to minorities in the country. They led to protests. Mentioned below are some instances of protests in the country due to the majority-minority conflicts:

  • During the Delhi communal violence, several people were killed, most of whom were Muslims. This incited further protests about the lack of protection for minorities. The capital city has been known to have seen the highest number of religious protests.
  • The 2020 Farm Bill protests by the Sikhs were due to the community’s rights being hampered by the structure of the bill. 
  • The 2019 Citizenship Amendment Act was violative of minorities’ rights as it had different procedural provisions for the majority and the minorities. 
  • The anti-conversion laws that prosecute Muslim men who marry Hindu women are criticised as discriminatory in nature. 

Therefore, policies, regulations, and special laws to protect minorities’ rights are essential in India.

Minorities’ Institution and Article 30 of the Indian Constitution

Empowered by Article 30(1), the minority communities in India have the right to establish and administer their own religious institutions, impart education to the children of their community, and inculcate religious values along with general education with minimum state interference. Several judicial pronouncements have shaped the interpretation of Article 30.

In S. Azeez Basha and Anr. vs. Union of India (1967), the Supreme Court interpreted the meaning of ‘establish and administer’. The Court stated that the minority education institutions that are established by such minority communities also have the right to administer their everyday affairs. Conversely, to have  the right to administer an educational institution, it is necessary that that minority community establish it with an intention of imparting education as a religious educational institution. In S.P. Mittal vs. Union of India (1982), the Supreme Court spoke about the prerequisites of Article 30 as the follows:

  1. The community has to show that they are a religious minority or linguistic minority.
  2. The community has to show that the educational institution was established by them.

It is only when these prerequisites are met that the minority community is granted authority to run and administer the educational institution.

In Andhra Pradesh Christian Medical Association vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. (1986), the Supreme Court held that the institution was not in fact an educational institution. It was a disguise used for running a business venture, and no educational institution was run by a minority community. The Court held that such a venture cannot avail benefits under Article 30, as it would not be applicable to them. In the State of Kerala, etc. vs. Very Rev. Mother Provincial, Etc. (1970), the Supreme Court held that even one member of the minority community is eligible to establish and administer an educational institution and impart education to the members of their community. The provisions of Article 30 shall be applicable to him/her in a similar way as they are applicable to the whole community.

In an important judgement of Ahmedabad St. Xaviers College vs. Government of Gujarat and Anr. (1974), the Supreme Court held that an educational institution established and administered by one minority community cannot deny admission to children from other minority communities or the majority community. The Court stated that educational institutions should be accessible to all, irrespective of the community that established them. 

State interference 

It is the obligation of the states to ensure the organisations and institutions in their state are run justly, in accordance with state-made laws, conforming to the laws of the nation, adhering to public policies, public order, health, safety, morality, security, sovereignty, and foreign relations of the country. In doing so, the states keep an observant eye and monitor the functioning of these institutions. The minority established and administered education institutions are no exception to this general rule and are, therefore, governed by state-made regulations.

The degree of state interference varies with different institutions, but the general degree of intervention is always there. The state government intervenes and instructs in the functioning of the institutions run with aid and recognition, or either, from the state government. On the contrary, the institutions that run with complete autonomy do not have to take instructions from the state government. However, they have to comply with the general standards of public policy, morality, and security.

The government intervenes in the following manner:

  • Regular checks on the management of the institutions.
  • Check the academic status and standards maintained by these institutions.
  • The state government has the power to take action against any misuse of power by the higher administration of these institutions.
  • The state government can keep an eye on the conduct of teaching and non-teaching staff of the institution.
  • The state government also ensures that the employees of these institutions follow the administrative regulations made by the institutions
  • The state government can make directive policies.
  • The state government can take measures for the welfare and betterment of the institutions.

Thus, the state government is empowered to take measures in a reasonably restricted manner from time to time to ensure the institutions are run in accordance with the laws. These instructions and measures are taken in a limited manner in a way that does not hamper the factors of autonomy and choice in these minority education institutions’ administration. In Bihar State Madrasa Education Board vs. Managing Committee of Madrasa (1989), the Supreme Court held that the states must not form rules and regulations and impose them on these minority educational institutions in a way that hampers the administrative rights of these institutions’ management, in the disguise of regulating to maintain standards and efficiency.

Power of government to regulate institutions run by minority

It is true that minorities have been given the right to establish, manage, or administer educational institutions of their own choice. However, this right is not absolute. It is necessary to have regulatory measures for the proper and smooth administration of such institutions. In the case of Ahmedabad St. Xavier’s College vs. State of Gujarat (1974), the court held that the right to administer implies and includes a duty to have good administration and management. Further, in the case of Re, Kerala Education Bill vs. Unknown (1958), the Supreme Court held that the right given under Article 30(1) does not mean that the state cannot prescribe reasonable regulations for such educational institutions. However, such a regulation or condition must not be the one that takes away the rights of minorities mentioned in the Article. 

In the case of Rev. Sidhajbahi Sabhai vs. State of Bombay (1962), an order was issued by the government of Bombay to reserve 80 percent of the seats of teachers in educational institutions run by minorities for the people nominated by the government. It further provides that any refusal by such nominees would lead to the withholding of affiliation with such institutions, and the aid would also be stopped. The Court held that such an order is violative of Article 30. Similarly, in the case of State of Kerala vs. Very Rev. Mother Provincial (1970), the Court held Section 63(1) of the Kerala University Act of 1969, as ultra vires on the ground that it violates the rights of minorities mentioned under Article 30 of the Constitution. The Section gave power to the government to take over the management of educational institutions run by minorities in case there was any default on their part.

Minorities’ Right to Education

The minorities are guaranteed the right to education, and special provisions are made under Article 30 of the Constitution. This right is not absolute in nature. This means that the right guaranteed under Article 30 is subject to reasonable restrictions. The state is vested with the power to impose reasonable restrictions under Article 19(6) of the Constitution. The ambit of Article 19(6) extends to the imposition of reasonable restrictions on minorities’ educational institutions.

The minority institutions that are fully aided by the state government lose the right to administer their educational institutions under Article 30. They only have the right to establish these educational institutions, and when they seek complete aid and recognition from the government, their administrative rights get vested in the government funding the running of these institutions. Article 29 facilitates Article 30 since Article 29 is interpreted to define minority communities by bringing into its ambit the people having a distinct language, culture, or script from the commonly spoken language and commonly following the culture of the country. It also promotes equality for minorities by stating that nobody shall be denied admission to an educational institution in the state on the grounds of religion, caste, language, etc. Therefore, Article 29 is followed by Article 30, which allows the minority communities of India to establish and administer educational institutions of their own.

The 44th Constitutional Amendment Act (1978) removed the right to property from the ambit of a fundamental right, but it continues to be a part of Article 30 to ensure the rights of minorities to hold properties for establishing their educational institutions are not hampered.

National Commission for Minorities

In 1978, the Ministry of Home Affairs passed a resolution establishing a National Commission for Minorities. First known as the Minorities Commission, it was a non-statutory body until 1984. In 1984, the Commission was moved to the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. As of 2020, the Commission has been renamed the National Commission for Minorities and functions under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Minorities. The Commission’s ambit covers only religious minorities (Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Parsis, and Jains) and excludes linguistic minorities. Formed with a chairperson, a vice chairperson and five members, the commission performs the following functions:

  • Evaluates the condition of minorities in India and the governments’ (central and state) efforts to improve it,
  • Checks the functioning of laws made for the benefit of minorities,
  • Makes recommendations for enacting laws that would improve the conditions of minorities in India,
  • Acts as the authority to take up complaints of cases of discrimination or agony of any minority community,
  • Works in coordination with the Central Government, studies, and submits reports to the Central Government on issues affecting minorities and plausible solutions.
  • Following these suggestions, the Parliament enacted the National Commission for Minorities Educational Institutions Act in 2004 to facilitate the provisions of Article 30 of the Indian Constitution.

Rights of non-minorities to run educational institutions 

Another question that needs to be answered is whether non-minorities can run, establish, and manage educational institutions in the same way as minorities. This question can be answered with the help of Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees citizens the right to practise any profession and carry on any occupation or business. This also means that non-minorities can establish and administer educational institutions. However, this right is subject to reasonable restrictions or any law made by the state in the interest of the general public.

In the case of P.A. Inamdar vs. State of Maharashtra (2002), the Court dealt with the question of the reservation of admission seats in private educational institutions, whether run by minorities or non-minorities. The court held that such reservations, whether in educational institutions run by minorities or non-minorities, is a violation of Article 30 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution as they affect their autonomy. It was further held that admission can be regulated by a common entrance exam, which enables the admission of students on the basis of merit. 

Other relevant articles of the Indian Constitution

Minorities are denoted as the ‘weaker sections’ of society. Thus, several provisions are made under the Indian Constitution for their benefit and to ensure equality. Mentioned below are the Articles of the Indian Constitution that are made for minorities’ benefit:

  • Article 14 is a fundamental right guaranteed to all Indian citizens. This Article ensures equality among all and promotes non-discrimination.
  • Article 15 protects people from discrimination on the basis of caste, creed, religion, language, or sex.
  • Article 16 guarantees equality in opportunity, education, and employment. This Article puts an obligation on the states to ensure fair and equal opportunities for all citizens of the particular state and ensure non-discrimination.
  • Article 25 guarantees religious freedom for Indians. Upholding the values of secularism in the country, Article 25 states that every Indian citizen shall have the freedom to practise and profess the religion of their choice. It states that there shall be no restrictions or hindrances put by the states or the Union in the religious affairs of people. However, Article 25 is to be exercised within the ambit of public order, morality, and other fundamental rights. 
  • Article 26 guarantees the freedom to establish and maintain religious charitable institutions,manage their affairs themselves, and acquire and maintain properties in this regard. These rights have to be practised by complying with public order, morality, and the security of the nation.
  • Article 28 states that state governments will not give any religious instructions to state-aided religious educational institutions. It further states that no student shall be compelled to take part in any religious instruction or arrangement without consent.
  • Article 29 states that no state-aided, state-recognised, or state-maintained educational institutions shall deny admission to a person on the basis of their sex, colour, creed, religion, case, or language. This Article guarantees cultural and educational rights to all communities in India. 

Landmark judgements under Article 30 of the Indian Constitution

In DAV College, Bathinda, Etc. vs. State of Punjab and Ors. (1971), the Supreme Court held that though it is a right conferred on the minority communities to impart education in their educational institutions in their regional language, it cannot be absolute. Even though the institution can impart education and instructions in Punjabi, there also have to be similar instructions in Hindi. Being an educational institution, it cannot hamper, deny, or discriminate against any other community in the country by restricting educational institutions to one language. Thus, while the Punjab University was given recognition by the state, the restrictive clauses of imparting education to only Punjabis were struck down by the Court as being invalid, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution.

In P.A. Inamdar and Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (2005), the Supreme Court gave a landmark judgement where it held that the reservation policy during admissions would not be applicable to minority educational institutions. Rather, it shall be on the basis of merit and shall be equally open to children of all religious and linguistic groups in India.

In S. Azeez Basha and Anr. vs. Union of India (Aligarh Muslim University Case (1967), the Supreme Court held that the Aligarh Muslim University has not been ‘established’ by a minority community. Thus, the Muslim community does not have the right to administer it either. The Aligarh Muslim University does not qualify as a minority education institution recognized by the parliament. This case was followed by the Dr. Naresh Agarwal vs. Union of India case (2005), where the claimed status of Aligarh Muslim University as a minority educational institution was struck down by the Court.

In the case of Managing Board of Milli Takimi Mission Bihar and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. (1984), the Supreme Court held that the right to education conferred on minority communities under Article 30 is a fundamental right. If the state denies recognition to any minority educational institution without just and fair grounds, such denial shall be deemed to be a violation of Article 30(1). 

Important case laws 

Ahmedabad St. Xaviers College v. State of Gujarat and Anr. (1974)

Facts of the case

The petitioners in this case run a minority education institution to provide higher education to Christian children but children belonging to other religious groups are also given admission. It is affiliated with state legislation named the Gujarat University Act of 1972. The petitioners in this case challenged the constitutional validity of the said Act on the grounds that it is encroaching on their right to run a minority educational institution. 

Issues involved in the case

  • Whether the above-mentioned Act is unconstitutional. 

Judgement of the court

In this case, the Supreme Court reflected on the purpose and spirit behind Article 30. The Court stated that the spirit behind Article 30 is the moral obligation of the nation towards minority communities. It is to ensure that the religious minorities and linguistic minorities of the country are not restricted from establishing, administering, and imparting education of their choice. They are given the utmost respect and freedom to instill the values and beliefs of their community in their children and shape them as responsible citizens of the country and pioneers of their community.

The court further held that the Act provides measures for affiliation in order to bring uniformity, efficiency and excellence to the courses offered by the university and is not violating Article 30. It was further held that no right is free from any kind of regulation or norm, as these provide for the maintenance of educational character. 

Miss. Ravneet Kaur vs. The Christian Medical College (1997)

Facts of the case

In this case, the petitioner claims to have been converted to Christianity and applied for admission to the college for the course of MBBS. The seats were reserved for the Christian Indian Nationals and she also gave the written test. She was informed that she had been provisionally selected for the courts and was asked to submit relevant documents along with a sponsorship letter. However, the bishop was out of town and the letter could not be produced. She was denied admission on this ground, even though she communicated the reasons to the college committee. The petitioner thus filed a writ petition in this regard. 

Issues involved in the case

  • Whether the writ petition is maintainable against a college that is private, unaided and affiliated with the university. 

Judgement of the Court

In this case, the Punjab-Haryana High Court held that an educational institution cannot discriminate against students of different religious or linguistic communities while giving admissions, on the ground that the institutions are not state-aided and hence not bound by the state’s instructions. The court observed that the petitioner produced the sponsorship letter; however, it was not from the concerned person. In this situation, the respondents cannot be blamed. It was further observed that she converted to Christianity only to seek admission to the college. Consequently, the writ was not granted and dismissed. 

Secretary of Malankara Syrian Catholic College v. T. Jose and Ors. (2006)

Facts of the case

The Malankara Syrian Catholic College Association is a society that runs several private colleges in Kerala. These are managed by a managing council appointed by the educational agency. Mar Ivanios College is one such college. The post of principal of the said college became vacant and the manager gave this post by order to one of the lecturers. This was challenged by the vice chancellor of the college. However, the Kerala University Appellate Tribunal held that the person appointed fulfilled the eligibility criteria, which was challenged in the higher court. It was also argued that the Kerala University Act of 1974, was violative of Article 30 of the Constitution. The same incident happened at another college and the petition was heard together. 

Issues involved in the case

  • Whether the petition is maintainable. 

Judgement of the court

In this case, the Supreme Court of India spoke about the purpose behind the provisions of Article 30 in detail. The Apex Court observed that the special rights given to minorities in India are with the intent of ensuring equal rights for them as the majority community of India. The Court further clarified that granting special rights to minorities does not render them an upper hand over the majority community, as it does not give them an advantage but rather a level playing field. The general rules of the state and the union are equally applicable to them as they are to others. The court observed that Section 57(3) of the Act interfered with the exercise of rights of minorities given under Article 30 and hence held that it could not be applied to minority institutions even if they are aided privately. 

Conclusion

Fundamental rights are the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of a country to its citizens. These are provided for the growth and development of every citizen without any discrimination on the basis of caste, creed, race, religion, gender, or language. However, there are chances that certain sections of citizens may be granted specific rights for example, cultural and educational rights. The Indian Constitution, under Article 30, provides the right to establish,manage, or administer educational institutions. However, this right is specifically guaranteed to minorities based on religion and language. This means that religious or linguistic minorities can establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

The purpose is to protect the rights of minorities, which may be suppressed in some way or another. The aim is to protect the educational rights of minorities along with their freedom to conserve their culture and language. However, the right given under Article 30 does not mean that the state cannot grant aid to such educational institutions. The article also provides that the state must not discriminate while granting aid to any educational institution on the grounds that it is managed by a minority or on other grounds like religion or language.

Indian minorities have suffered several hardships in the form of violence, discrimination, hate, and a lack of representation. To curb these atrocities, the Union Government, legislators, and policymakers have come up with laws, legislation, regulations, and special rights for minority communities. One such right is guaranteed to them under Article 30. This Article facilitates minority communities in establishing and administering educational institutions of their choice. They are given administrative autonomy with minimum interference from the government. This is done with a view to ensuring equality and equal opportunities for the religious and linguistic minorities of the nation when it comes to education. Even with various governmental efforts over the years, the violence, discrimination, and hate are believed to have continued until today. Time will tell what becomes of Indian minorities and the extent to which their atrocities are reduced by the government.

Frequently Asked  Questions (FAQs)

Is there any separate legislation on the right to education?

The right to education is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21A of the Constitution, and separate legislation has been enacted for further fulfilment of the objectives of such rights. The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, also provides for the free and compulsory education of children. This Act has been enacted in line with the right to education.

What is the difference between Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution?

The major difference between the two articles is that Article 29 applies only to citizens, while Article 30 applies to citizens and non-citizens both.

What was the effect of the 44th Amendment Act on Article 30 of the Constitution?

As a result of the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, a new clause was inserted under Article 30 of the Constitution. Article 30(1A) provided that while making any law for the compulsory acquisition of any property of any established educational institution administered by a minority, the state must ensure that the amount fixed for the acquisition of such property is not restricting or abrogating the rights of minorities. 

Can the majority community be denied admission to a minority educational institution?

No, as per Article 29(2), no community can be denied permission to attend a minority educational institution on the basis of discrimination.

Are the rights under Article 30 absolute in nature?

No. Article 30 is not absolute in nature. It is subject to state intervention and minimum reasonable restrictions to uphold public order, decency, and morals. 

What are cultural and educational rights?

Cultural and educational rights are guaranteed by the Constitution to religious and linguistic minority groups in India to enable them to preserve their distinct culture, language, or script. 

What is the dual test criteria?

For showing that an educational institution is in fact a minority educational institution, the dual test is taken. It is to be proved that:

  1. The educational institution must be regulative in nature. It must not be destructive of the institution’s nature of being a ‘minority institution.’ 
  2. The institution must be an effective institution for facilitating education to minorities.

References 

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here