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

Dr Dhavan submits on surrender v. continuity, gives examples from the AMU Act on the transfer of property, on faculty etc from MAO to AMU shows continuity and not surrender.

Dhavan reads from submissions on the Decision of Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust and Others. v. Union of India

Dhavan : statutory recognition is under 15(5) and 15(6) and constitutional recognition is under Article 30

Dhavan refers to post-constitution guarantees under Articles 25-28 , mentions Article 29(2) and 30(1)- the reconciliation between these two is that under 29(2) you cannot discriminate to the other people but you can discriminate under 30 for your own people.

Dhavan: Articles 15 and 16 are negative discrimination, you cannot discriminate on the grounds of religion, But articles 15(5) and 15(6) is important ....so this exception is an important exception, not only do you get a constitutional recognition, you also get statutory recognition.

Dhavan takes the bench through various Pre-Independence electoral Acts on provisions reserving seats for minorities including Muslims, Sikhs and Christians

Dhavan: now i go into the minority rights before and after the Indian Constitution. The reason why I say before, the 1909 Act recognises the minority character of Muslims in an electoral context no doubt but definitely the question of what constitutes a minority before the constitution in squarely raised in 1909 Act , 1919 Act and the GOI Act, later on another minority was added that was Sikhs. Therefore minority status mylords was something that was known before the constitution, it isn't a question that arises only after the constitution. Certainly the courts were aware and the relevant provision ill indicate later.

Dhavan: After the Independence Act there are two points mentioned by lordships the first is the dispensation of Article 30 and the second is the dispensation of UGC Act. Now what prevailed after the UGC Act in essence also prevailed before the constitution as well had this minoroty character not been recognised there would have been no partition in India. We see that minority character was fundamental in understanding what was there before the constitution.

Dhavan : its a question of appeal on Basha, we have raised these questions relating to Basha and therefore to say that Basha is not an issue would be entirely incorrect. 

Dhavan: much has been said about scope of reference... my submission is that reference in this case not had been delineated by this court has to be has to be abstracted from the 81 reference and more importantly from the 2019 reference.

Dhavan takes the bench through his written submission 

Dr Dhavan: i interned with Mr Sibal and told him tell me how to reduce 500 pages to just 3, so he gave me lots of briefs to read and he's my guru...so this side I don't go to Allahabad

Dr Dhavan: Iam sorry that I interrupted my lords and I apologise, there have been two views on me, one is that I came out blazing with all guns blazing the other one was - that Dr Rajiv Dhavan has made his own detailed submissions with a melange of legal acumen coupled with passion thereby exaggerated the attack, this is good my lord

Dhavan: in my reply there are some questions that fell from your lordships. The question of Indicia for eg. The questions on surrender v. continuity; national character v. an excellence, therefore ill briefly take you through all that. 

The Court resumes. Petitioners present their rejoinder arguments