ABSTRACT

Name: Raj Kumar

Semester: III
Roll No: 2018LLB068
Topic: Article 29 and 30 of Indian Constitution

Article 29 of Indian Constitution

Protection of interests of minorities
(1) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part
thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the
right to conserve the same
(2) No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution
maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of
religion, race, caste, language or any of them.
Article 30 of Indian Constitution
Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions
(1) All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to
establish and administer educational institutions of their choice
(1A) In making any law providing for the compulsory acquisition of any
property of an educational institution established and administered by a
minority, referred to in clause ( 1 ), the State shall ensure that the 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
(2) The state shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate
against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the
management of a minority, whether based on religion or language

Relation between Article 29 &30

The Supreme Court while interpreting the scope of article 29 and 30 of the
Constitution in re, Kerala education bill held that the right to establish and
maintain educational institution of their own choice is necessary concomitant to
the right of minority to conserve their distinctive language, script and culture
through educational institution. The right under article 30(1) is subjected to
clause (2) of article 29 which provides that no citizen shall be denied admission
into educational institution maintained by the state or receiving the aid out of
the state fund, on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of
them.13 The court, after reviewing its earlier decisions, held in case of St.
Xavier’s College v. State of Gujarat that article 29(1) and 30(1) deal with
distinct matters and may be considered supplementing each other so far as
certain cultural rights are concerned. Article 30(1) covers institution imparting
general secular education. The object of article 30 is to enable children of
minorities to go out in the world fully equipped.14 If Article 29 and 30 are
grouped together it will be wrong to restrict the rights of minority to establish
and administer educational institution concerned with language script and
culture of the minorities.
Relevant Case Laws:
 In the case of Azeez Basha v. Union of India 7, the Supreme Court held that
if an educational institution is not been established by the minority community
then they have no right to administer it. The term “established” and
“administered” have to be read in coordination. The University Grants
Commission Act prohibits the formulation of “University” established by the
educational institution unless and until it is governed by law.
1. Wanchoo clearly stated that the article cannot be read to mean that even if
the minority institution had been established by any other authority (Act of
Parliament), in this case, the religious minority cannot avail the services of
the university because “establish” and “authority” are the terms which are
complementary to each other.
 In the case of Dr. Naresh Agarwal v. Union of India8, where 50% of the
seats to be filled on the basis of entrance examination conducted by Aligarh
Muslim University and the other 50% of the seats was reserved for Muslim
Candidates. The petitioners in this case, who are Hindu by caste have been
deprived of their right to participate in the process of admission against that
50%. The Allahabad High Court followed the judgment of Azeez Basha v.
Union of India and held that AMU is not a minority institution and struck
down the amendment which was made in the favour of Aligarh Muslim
University.

 A similar judgment was passed by the Kerala High Court in the case of A.M
Patroni v. Kesavan10 in which it was held that “any religious or linguistic
 community which is less than 50% of the total population shall be
considered as a “minority”.
 D.A.V College, Bathinda v. State of Punjab & Ors [11]
For the purpose of article 30(1) a community may constitute a minority
based on language, even though they may not have a separate script; it
would be enough if they have a separate spoken language.

Right to administer
 The word “administers” under article 30(1) of the Constitution means the
right to manage and conduct the affairs of the institution. It is open to a
university to impose reasonable conditions upon a minority institution for
maintaining the requisite educational standard and efficiency like-
 Qualifications of teachers to be appointed in the institution;
 Conditions of service e.g the age of superannuation of teachers;
 Qualifications for entry of students;
 Courses of study (subject to special subjects which the institution may seek
to teach)
 Hygiene and physical training of students.12

 In State of Bombay v. Bombay Education Society, it was held that

“Where…..A minority like the Anglo Indian community, which is based,
inter-alia, on religion and language has the fundamental right to conserve its
language, script and culture under Article 29(1) and has the right to establish
and administer educational institution of their choice under Article
30(1)5 surely then there must be implicit in the fundamental right, the right
to impart instruction in their own institutions to children of their own
community in then own language such being the fundamental right the
police power of the state to determine the medium of instruction must yield
to the fundamental right to the extent it is necessary to give effect to it and
can not be permitted to run counter to it”
 In St. Xavier’s College v. The State of Gujarat, the court held that the
right to administer is the right to ‘conduct’ and ‘manage’ the affairs of the
institution.

Admission Procedure in Minority Educational Institution

 In St. Stephen’s College v. University of Delhi14, the preference is given to

Christian students by St.Stephen’s College was challenged.
 The Supreme Court by the majority of 1 to 4 held that the college is not bound
to follow the university circulars as it will deprive the college of their minority
character. The right to select students for admission is an important facet of
administration. This power also can be regulated but the regulation must be
reasonable and should be conducive to the minority institutions. The
impugned directive of the university to select students on the uniform basis of
marks secured in the qualifying examinations would deny the right to the
college to admit students belonging to the Christian community. Unless some
concession is provided to the Christian students.