Dr.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL

LAW UNIVERSITY

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - 1

PROJECT WORK

SUBMITTED TO – SUBMITTED BY –
Dr. ATUL KUMAR TIWARI NAMAN YADAV
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR Enrollment No.- 210101092
(CONSTITUTIONAL LAW) B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)
Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University 3rd Semester, Section ‘B’

1
 AN ANALYSIS OF THE CULTURAL AND
EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF MINORITIES
IN INDIA

INTRODUCTION

Specific minority rights to culture and education are crucial and very important since they
serve as a tool for the advancement of minorities. The preservation of culture, language, and
religion is crucial because it plays a vital role in the harmonious growth of children from
minority communities. Without education, a community cannot advance, and education is
essential for a society to develop. There is a wide disparity between minority and majority
groups seen all across the world. A particular minority right today has become a prerequisite
for the sake of equality and good relations between the communities. 

Numerous ethnic, religious, caste, and linguistic minorities belonging to various belief
systems, subcultures, and geographical areas make up India. Since 1947, the integration of
these many communities—some of which are sizable enough to aspirationally claim a
regional homeland and others who are satisfied to remain a part of the Indian state—has been
a major concern for Indian governments.

CONTEMPORARY COMPREHENSION OF THE WORD MINORITY

The Constitution's Article 30 discusses two different minority communities: linguistic and
religious. Although it outlines the categories of minority populations, the government has not
given the term an official definition.

However, various articles from the Constitution and several governmental reports provide a
number of helpful hints. According to Article 29(1), anybody who has " a distinct language,

2
script or culture of its own" has the right to preserve it. This provision protects the rights of
minority communities.
It can be inferred from the text's language that communities with unique languages, scripts, or
cultures are considered minorities. However, following instances in, including Bal Patil v.
Union of India and the Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka, show that courts
also can consider other aspects, like economic benefit, when determining whether a
community is a minority or not.

In Re: Kerala Education Bill 19571, the Supreme Court decided that the term "minority" refers
to a "community, which is numerically less than 50%" of the entire population, whereas S. R.
Das, C.J. suggested the procedures of arithmetic tabulation. A Division Bench of the Kerala
High Court held in A. M. Patroni v. Kesavan2 that the term "Minority" is not defined in the
constitution and that, in the absence of a special definition, any community that is religious or
linguistic and makes up less than 50% of the population of the State in question is entitled to
the fundamental rights protected by Article 30 of the Constitution.

In D. A. V College Bhatinda v/s State of Punjab3 and others, the Supreme Court held that
“What constitute a linguistic or religious minority must be judged in relation to the State in
as much as the impugned Act was a State Act and not in relation to the whole of India”.
 
In St. Stephen's College v/s University of Delhi4, the court ruled that persons who belong to
an identifiable group of Indian citizens must unavoidably be considered minorities under
Article 30. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Bramchari Sidheswari v/s State of West
Bengal that the Ram Krishna Mission, which Swami Vivekananda founded to spread the
Vedanta principles espoused by Ram Krishnais, is not a minority religion distinct from
Hinduism but rather a religious sect or denomination of Hinduism and is therefore not
empowered to claim the fundamental right under Article 30(1) of the constitution to establish
and manage educational institutions of choice. 

In Bal Patil v. Union of India5, the court ruled that the central government must use its
authority to identify minority groups not just based on the commission's recommendations but
also taking into account the social, cultural, and religious circumstances of the community in
that state. Statistics created to demonstrate a community's numerical minority status cannot

1
AIR 1958 SC 956.
2
AIR 1965 Ker. 75 at p-76.
3
1971 AIR 1731
4
AIR 1992 SC 1630
5
AIR 2005 SC 3172

3
serve as the only criterion. It may not be necessary to inform them that they are a minority
under the Act and to extend any special treatment or protection to them as a minority if it is

determined that the majority of the community's members belong to the wealthy class of
industrialists, businessmen, professionals, and property owners.

SCOPE OF MINORITY RIGHTS IN INDIA

Minorities in India are granted justiciable rights under the constitution. The ambit of
minorities' rights is fairly broad. This is done in order to safeguard minorities' interests. The
minorities are receiving a special status by virtue of the constitutional mandate. Minority
rights positions in law are governed by the state's regulatory authority.  It is important to
understand that language and religion must be the basis to count minorities and other group
like S. C and S. T are not minorities as contemplated in article 29 and 30.

According to Article 29, everyone who lives in India has the right to preserve their
distinct language, script, or culture, and no State educational institution or institution
receiving state funding is allowed to discriminate against anyone based on their race, caste,
creed, or other characteristics. Minority communities are guaranteed their rights at
educational institutions, and discrimination against them is prohibited by Article 30.
Arguements that the reservation system and the special protections for minorities
are "cushioning" in nature have also been brought by many. But in Ahmedabad St. Xaviers
College vs State Of Gujarat & Anr6, judge Khanna held that such arrangements are necessary
to “none might have the feeling that any section of the population consisted of first-class
citizens and the other of second class citizens”. He added that most of the Constitution's
Fundamental Rights support majority rights just as much as they do minority rights.

Hidayatullah C.J. stated in the Kerala Education Bill case that while Article 30 (1) may be a
general protection over different languages and scripts, it is also right to establish educational 
questions of choice in institutions managed by minority communities. Therefore, even if an
institution's principal goal is not to preserve minority culture, this Act nonetheless applies to
institutions run and formed by minority populations that also allow students from other
background.

6
1974 AIR 1389

4
RIGHTS OF MINORITIES TO ESTABLISH AND MANAGE
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF CHOICE

RIGHT TO ESTABLISH EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

The Supreme Court of India concluded in the case of Azeez Basha v. Union of India7 that the
word "establish" implies "to bring into existence," and that the right granted to the minority
by article 30(1) is the right to establish an educational institution and, if they do so, to manage
it. In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether the Muslim minority founded Aligarh
Muslim University. It was decided that the Muslim Community may start a university before
the constitution took effect. Now, the University Grants Commission Act forbids any
educational institution from describing itself as a "university" unless it is established by law.

In this case, it was also argue that although if this university may not be considered a minority
institution, it will still be open to Muslims having administering rights. But the supreme court
disagreeing held that the article makes it quite clear that, as long as they have established
them, minorities will have the freedom to run any educational institutions of their choosing.
The clause cannot be interpreted to suggest that any religious minority, regardless of who
founded the educational institution, has the right to run it since, for one reason or another, it
may have been running it prior to the constitution's entry into force. Therefore, the words
"establish" and "administrate" need to be understood as complementing.

AMU is not a minority institution, according to the Allahabad High Court's ruling in the
recent case of Naresh Agarwal v. Bharat. The court rejected the change made to the AMU
legislation to provide a reservation for Muslim students. The Court adopted the decision in the
Azeez Bashe v. Union of India case. The Supreme Court ruled in S. K. Patro v. State of Bihar8
that the mere fact that funds were obtained from abroad to aid in the establishment and
development of the school, which was established by a minority in India, or that its
management was occasionally carried out by someone who was not an Indian citizen could
not be grounds for denying it the protection of Article 30(1).

In T. M. A Pai Foundation v/s State of Karnataka9 case, an issue was decided, “Is there a
fundamental right to set up educational institution and if so, under which provision?”
7
AIR 1968 SC 662
8
AIR 1970 SC 259
9
AIR 2003 SC 355 at p-379

5
The court decided that there are two such rights by virtue of Article 19(1)(g) [the right to a
profession subject to the reasonable restrictions of Article 19(6)] and Article 19(6) for non-
minority groups. and Article 26, which grants "the right to establish and operate educational
institutions to all citizens and religious groupings." The Constitution also includes provisions
for minority communities in Article 29(1) and Article 30(1).

RIGHTS TO ADMINISTER INSTITUTION DULY ESTABLISHED

Right to administer in a word means administering, sustaining, shaping, organising, and
planning an institution's internal affairs. In a very broad sense, the right to govern a minority
education institution denotes the authority to choose the teaching and other staff, to admit
students, to choose the medium of instruction, etc.

The court observed in Re Kerala Education Bill10 that the right to administer educational
institution of choice is not absolute.

The court ruled in St. Xavier College v. State of Gujarat11 that the right to administer an
institution includes the right to successfully manage and conduct the institution's operations.
The administration right, according to the court, includes day-to-day management. Personal
management is integral component of independent administration. The university will always
be entitled to right that empowers it to curb improper administration. If there are
administrative mistakes, the university will take action to fix them.

There is no restriction on the subject that can be taught in such an institution, nor are they
prohibited from providing general education. The majority of students at the school do not
have to practise the minority faith in question for that minority to be protected under article
30(1). Thus, the community has complete control over the institution's nature and goals.

In State of Bombay v. Bombay Education Society12, the Supreme Court upheld this position.
This case held Bombay circular order ultra vires to the constitution which directed the
minority to English to minorities to pupils whose mother tongue in English. By giving this
judgment the court strengthened minority institution right to freely administer their institution
as they pleased.

10
AIR 1958 SC 956
11
1974 AIR 1389
12
AIR 1954 SC 561

6
The rights to establish educational institution of choice is covered under article 30(1) of the
constitution. Their choice must be necessarily include a choice to determine the language
of instruction in such institution as discussed above.

RIGHTS TO AFFILIATION IS NOT A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

The Supreme Court upheld this position in the case of State of Bombay v. Bombay Education
Society. Das C. J. noted: You may be wondering if affiliation or recognition are also
Fundamental Rights when the right of minority communities to establish and manage
educational institutions is a Fundamental Right. In the end, a state-level affiliation or
recognition is essential for an institution to reach a certain level of excellence.

In the case of Sidhraj Bhai v. State of Gujarat13, this same issue was raised. The court
acknowledged the value of affiliation but rejected the idea that it was a fundamental right. It
was determined in following judgments, such as T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of
Karnataka14 and P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra15, that the government is permitted to
establish guidelines that institutions must adhere to in order to receive affiliation. The goal of
these rules must be high academic standards.

UNAIDED MINORITIES INSTITUTIONS

Courts have generally agreed, as seen in the cases of T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. the State of
Karnataka and P.A. Inamdar v. the State of Maharashtra, that while these institutions have
autonomy over management, they must ensure that when it comes to admissions they adhere
to Article 29(2), which states that employers and students who are a majority of the
community should be admitted.

On the other hand the government has the authority to control the management of aided
schools, including the fee schedule, student admittance, and instructor hiring. They will have
set quotas based on regional needs.

13
AIR 1963 SC. 540
14
AIR 2003 SC355
15
(2005) 6 SCC 537

7
CONCLUSION

The actual significance of Articles 29(2) and 30(1) seems to lie in the fact that they expressly
foresee a minority institution that frequently admits outsiders. Article 30(1) does not allow a
minority to establish a school primarily for the benefit of members of its own community, as
was furthered in the ST. Stephen College case. The establishment of such an institution for
the sole advantage of the minority is not permitted. The Court found that every educational
institution, regardless of the community to which it belongs, serves as a melting pot in our
society and that it is crucial that there be a suitable balance of students from various
communities in every educational institution.
According to our constitution, diversity makes us stronger. As a result, the they protected the
minority's right to preserve their culture. Religious and linguistic minorities are included
under this provision, and minority status is not just based on religion. Groups that share a
common language or religion but are outnumbered by another social group in a particular
region of the nation or nationwide are considered minorities. These communities are entitled
to protect and develop them.

Now, linguistic and religious minorities can establish their own educational institutions thanks
to these provisions. They are able to develop and retain their culture in this way.

This article attempted to comprehend not just who the government defines as minorities but
also the reasoning behind its recent changes to reservation policy for minority colleges. The
country have witnessed the laborious process that answered crucial questions , like "who may
be considered a minority" and "is affiliation a Fundamental Right,". Although it is obvious
that our judiciary has accomplished much in the area of protecting the rights of cultural and
educational minorities, it appears that we still have a long way to go.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

8
1. V. N. Shukla, Constitution of India, 11th Ed. 2008, p-261
2. Who is a ‘minority’ in India?, available at:
https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-who-is-a-minority-in-india-
supreme-court-7840064/ (Last visited on 30 October, 2022)
3. AIR 1958 SC 956.
4. AIR 1965 Ker. 75 at p-76.
5. 971 AIR 1731
6. AIR 1992 SC 1630
7. AIR 2005 SC 3172
8. 1974 AIR 1389
9. AIR 1968 SC 662
10. AIR 1970 SC 259
11. AIR 2003 SC 355 at p-379
12. AIR 1958 SC 956
13. 1974 AIR 1389
14. AIR 1954 SC 561
15. AIR 1963 SC. 540
16. AIR 2003 SC355
17. (2005) 6 SCC 537