"I must tell you that there is nothing political about it. The Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) was set up by an Act of the Parliament when India was not free. It was under British rule. Therefore, it is not correct to say that it was set up by Muslims.
"There is a judgement of the Supreme Court of (October 20 1967) of a bench of five-judges declaring that the AMU was not a minority institution and that legal position still holds," Rohatgi told a television news channel.
Rohatgi said there was an attempt in the "1980s to try and reverse" the position of AMU by way of an amendment.
"That amendment was not enough to overturn the view (of the Supreme Court). That amendment was challenged in the High Court. The High Court has struck down the amendment saying that 1967 judgement is still binding.
Rohatgi further said that he cannot speak "generally of
all the institutions as there may be some institutions which are minority institutions and are set up by the minority".
"As far as AMU is concerned, I am only speaking about AMU because I have only studied the AMU case. The AMU is not set up by the minority. It was set up by an act of Parliament and that position we have taken," he said.
Earlier too, the Attorney General had told the apex court that AMU was set up by a central act and moreover, a constitution bench in 1967 in the Aziz Basha case had held it to be a "central university" and not a minority institution.
Rohatgi had said that to circumvent the effect of the judgement, an amendment was brought in 1981 in the central act to accord the minority status to the university which has recently been held as unconstitutional by the High Court.
The Allahabad High Court had in January 2006 struck down the provision of the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981 by which the University was accorded minority status.
AMU Act was enacted in 1920 dissolving and incorporating Mohammedan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College. AMU (Amendment) Act in 1951 was passed by Parliament to do away with compulsory instruction in Muslim theology. The amendment opened membership of the Court of AMU to non-Muslims.
Changes were introduced by the 1966 amendment to AMU Act, which was challenged before the Supreme Court by S Aziz Basha.
Another amendment to AMU Act in 1972 made the academic and executive councils more democratic and drastically reduced the nominees of the Visitor.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
