Aligarh Muslim University Minority Status: Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing [Day 7]

The intervenors now make their submissions before the bench

Sr Advocate Vikarmjit Banerjee makes his short submissions

Banerjee submits on BR Ambedkar and decision in Bal Patil's reference on the question of minority and history of how minorities are formed.  

Navare: BHU and AMU are both in power in entry 63, the moment you recognise it minority, the even-handedness in respect to powers of parliament in handling the two institutions will be rewritten as a result of that  

Navare: if AMU is funded by the govt, it is a state under article 12. if its a state under article 12, it cannot do something which a minority institution is entitled to do. Virtually my lord though it is state and bound by article 15, 16 it will not be liable to do that, its the consequence that arises in allowing to do that 

Navare : second submission, the dangers in accepting the independent status of the AMU, dangers not in political or social sense but purely the legal sense. Entry 63 takes care of AMU as institution of National Importance. If AMU is recognised to be minority institution, the parliament will be robbed of the powers conferred under entry 63

Navare reads from written submissions

Sr Adv Vinay Navare makes his submissions

Navare : I submit on scope of reference , on facts and law of 1920 and the interpretation of those facts 

Kumar concludes his submissions

Kumar: (referring to Re Kerala Education Bill Case) this court said that there is nothing in 30 which prevents even institution established and administered prior to the constitution claiming under 30. Please look at this in two time phrase, the status pre-consitution and second at the time of the constitution and thereafter...

Kumar : two thing shave to be there, that you were established and administered, I am proceeding on the assumption that its a minority and therefore they can claim under 30.. the submission is that you ought to have been established and administered prior to the constitution. You cannot say at the commencement of the constitution, I am putting up my hand and claiming minority....

Kumar : one more thing, post the constitution, all the amendments really clarify it not a minority, the approach that was adopted in Ramjanambhoomi that was off course in context of private property rights, my lords said that you look at it in context of when old claims were being made prior to 1800, 1700... my lords have two wholesome approaches. 1. whatever is recognised under British rule and expressly adopted; 2. post-constitution 

Kumar submits on the aspects of amalgamation and conglomeration of MAO and AMU