Wrong for govt to say it can’t defend AMU Act changes: SC

Tribune News Service

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, January 24

The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed surprise over the Centre not defending a 1981 amendment to the Aligarh Muslim University Act on its minority status, saying the government has to stand by parliamentary amendments.

“How can you not accept an amendment by Parliament? Mr Solicitor, Parliament is an eternal indestructible body under the Indian Union. Irrespective of which government represents the cause of the Union of India, Parliament’s cause is eternal, indivisible and indestructible,” a seven-judge Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.

On the fifth day of the hearing on minority status of the AMU, the Bench posed several questions to the Centre.

The Bench was examining if the AMU was a minority institution under Article 30 of the Constitution, which conferred the right to “establish and administer” educational institutions on religious and linguistic minorities. It’s also testing the correctness of a 2006 judgment of the Allahabad High Court, declaring that the AMU was not a minority institution. As Justice Khanna asked if the government accepted the 1981 amendment to the AMU Act, Mehta said, “I am not.”

A surprised CJI, said, “I can’t hear the Government of India say that an amendment which Parliament made is something it doesn’t stand by. You have to stand by this amendment. You have an option. Go through the amending route and change the amending Act again.”

Noting that he was answering constitutional questions raised by a seven-judge Constitution Bench, Mehta said the amendment in question was declared unconstitutional by the Allahabad High Court in 2006 and as a law officer it was his right, entitlement and duty to say that this view appeared to be correct.

Terming Mehta’s submission as radical, the CJI said, “You have to stand by what Parliament has done. Parliament can always amend the statute, in which case a law officer can say I have an amended statute now… Can we hear any organ of the Union Government say that notwithstanding a Parliamentary amendment, I don’t accept this amendment?”

Intense debate over Emergency

Would a law officer be expected to say whatever Constitutional amendments were made during the Emergency were correct only because they were made by Parliament? — Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General

The power to decide that is in the elected body, which is Parliament. Parliament can always say what we did during Emergency was wrong and we are rectifying it. — DY Chandrachud, CJI

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.

#Supreme Court