Name of the case: State Of Punjab And Ors. v.

Bhatinda District Cooperative

Citations of case:1971 AIR 1731, 1971 SCR 677
Court :Supreme Court of India
Bench:Sikri, S.M. (Cj), Mitter, G.K., Hegde, K.S., Grover, A.N., Reddy, P.
Jaganmohan
Date of judgement:05/05/1971
Acts involved:Gurunanak University Act, 1969; Indian Constitution.
Sections/Articles involved:Section 4, section 4(1), section 4(2), and section 5 of
the Gurunanak University Act. Article 19 (1) (c), 19 (1) (f), Article 14, Article
26, Article 29(1), Article 30 (1) of the Indian Constitution.

PETITIONER:
D. A. V. COLLEGE BATHINDA, ETC.Vs
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

Introduction
As mentioned earlier the term ‘minority’ isn’t outlined anyplace within the Indian Constitution,
however the term is mentioned solely in 2 articles of the Indian Constitution and is Article
twenty nine and Article thirty. The DAV faculty case is concerning education among students of
minority standing. Dayanand Anglo religious writing faculty was supported in memory of Hindu
Dayananda Saraswati, the founding father of Arya Samaj. Arya Samaj was supported on
Gregorian calendar month ten, 1875 and this movement relies entirely on fashionable Hinduism
and opposes the notion of immortality, child marriage human separation, idolatry, animal
sacrifice, and so on. He believes in one god. Establishments discovered below the auspices of the
DAV faculty Trust and therefore the Managing Society teach the principles of Arya Samaj and
convey the religious cullture

The facts of the case

There were fourteen complaints filed in a letter. The candidates came from numerous
establishments owned and operated by the Dayanand Anglo religious writing faculty Trust and
therefore the Managing Society. The appliance was filed in alternative jurisdictions below the
Gurunanak University Act, 1969; many special sections were section 4, section 4(1), section
4(2), and section 5. Consistent with the candidates those sections contravened Article 19 (1) (c),
19 (1) (f), Section 14 , Article 26, Section 29 (1), Section 30(1) of the Constitution of Republic
of India. Also, the provisions of the Gurunanak Act ar unconstitutional and don’t seem to be
wrongfully binding.

Background of the case:

Dayanand Anglo Vedic College Trust and Managing Society manages and manages alternative
establishments below DAV faculty. These establishments collaborated with geographic region
University (East geographic region Act seven of 1947) before the geographic region
Reorganization Act was passed. When the partition of Republic of India there have been some
Sikh protests within the geographic region Province as a result of they needed a unique country.
Watching the news the geographic region Kingdom and therefore the Government of Haryana
were divided below the position of the sovereign. The Reconciliation law was later elapsed
parliament. Chandigarh, currently a union territory, was created the capital of the geographic
region and Haryana Kingdoms. On June 30, 1962 a notice was issued within the geographic
region University Act instructive the powers of geographic region University among ten miles
and therefore the human center didn’t arrive among ten miles. On May 13, 1969 another
proclamation was issued as subdivision in section 5 of the Act stating that the University might
exercise its jurisdiction in four provincial territories and namely: Patiala, Sangrur, Batinda and
Rupar. This notice greatly affected the applicant’s establishments, as a results of that those
establishments lost all University facilities and ceased to be related

Question involved :The main issues raised in this case are:

 Will the Hindus of the Punjab Kingdom be considered a minority?
 What determines the ‘religious or linguistic minority’?

Related cases
Rev. Father W. Proost & Others v. State of province & Others
In this case the appliance was created to challenge the change of Section 48(a) of the province
State University Act (Bihar, Bhagalpur and Ranchi), 1960 by the second amendment law, 1961
because the candidates argued that the change was on the far side the scope and powers of
Article 29 and Article30 . The petition was filed by the Director, principal, and few guardians of
St. Joe Louis students. Xavier’s college. The appliance is filed under article 32 of the
Constitution of India. St. Joe Louis faculty Saint Francis Xavier was supported by the Ranchi
Catholics. The faculty was related to with the University of Patna in 1944. The principles and
rules of the faculty were organized as Christian Missionary to stay the Catholic spirit within the
faculty, and therefore the faculty administration was headed by eleven members. However all
students are welcome to be admitted whether they are Catholic or not. And it will be
aforementioned that the center was noninheritable by a tiny low community. The court thus
considered:
“It is obvious that a minority community will effectively preserve their own language, script or
culture through academic establishments, therefore, the proper to determine and maintain
academic establishments of their selection is in line with the proper to preserve its own
distinctive language, text or culture.
“It is clear that a minority community can effectively preserve their own language, script
or culture through educational institutions, therefore, the right to establish and maintain
educational institutions of their choice is in line with the right to preserve its own unique
language, text or culture. . ”
Section 29 (1) of the Constitution of India states:
"Any class of citizens residing in the Indian subcontinent or any part of it with a different
language, script or culture, shall be entitled to equal protection."
Section 30 (1) of the Constitution of India states:
"All young people, regardless of religion or language, will have the right to establish and manage
an educational institution of their choice."
Core argument involved in case:
The court finds that the concept of Section 29 (1) is broader than the concept of Section 30 (1).
Article 29 (1) gives rights to any minority community throughout the country but Article 30 (1)
gives rights only to a few based on religion or language. The court also noted that the two
articles could not be read together as reading together would give rise to a different meaning.

Judgement by court:
In response to the second issue the court cited the Kerala Re-reading Bill, 1957 though there was
no mention of however it can be thought to be a minority society. However, there has been very
little effort to determine the position of non secular or linguistic minority in regard to all peoples
of the countryIn the case of the Kerala education bill it has been seen that few should be decided
in a way that applies to all citizens of the country. The Punjab religion states that Hindus are a
minority of religions throughout the province however not within the whole country. “DAV
college notbe compelled to befits state law that stipulates that bound subject directions should be
drained Punjabi within the Gurumukhi Script.” And subsection (3) of the Act doesn’t exceed the
bounds established below Article 29 (1) of the Constitution of Republic of India.
Decision taken by court:
The University Act in partnership with these Colleges must address their needs and allow them
to manage their institutions in their own way and issue directives during the writing of their
examinations. In this regard applications are also subject to costs. Circulars in trouble 15-6-1970
as amended by Circular 2-7-1970 as per the decision of the Senate Sub-Committee 1-7- 1970 and
7-10-1970 are considered invalid and ultra vires of powers conferred on the University. It costs
one hearing aid.
The Punjab states that Hindus are a minority of religions throughout the province but not in the
whole country. “DAV College could not be compelled to comply with state law which stipulates
that certain subject instructions must be done in Punjabi in the Gurumukhi Script.” And
subsection (3) of the Act does not exceed the limits established under Article 29 (1) of the
Constitution of India.

Case comments:
Maintaining ‘equality’ among the citizens of the country is very important in keeping in mind the
special privileges granted to the few. In a populous country like India it is important to look at
equality to maintain unity and peace among citizens. Apart from a number of special privileges
granted to the minority, the small community is facing a major competitive struggle with the
majority. The country should also focus on economically fewer than a few religions or
languages, and this will put more equality among the country's citizens and will also contribute
to economic growth in a developing country like India.
The authorities, however, did not dare to take the minority in favor of the state as a matter of
course as it is a sensitive issue and it is much easier for the government to maintain the status
quo.

Footnotes:

DAV College Etc v. State of Punjab & Others, Indian Kanoon, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1596466/

DAV College Etc v. State of Punjab & Others Summary, Enotes, https://www.enotes.com/homework-
help/summary-dv-college-vs-state-punjab-case-and-javed-495544