AMN / WEB DESK
The Supreme Court today expressed surprise over the Centre’s stand that it does not accept the 1981 amendment to the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) Act, which effectively accorded minority status to the institution, and said the government has to stand by what Parliament has done.
A seven-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, which is hearing arguments on the vexed question regarding the minority status of AMU, observed Parliament is an “eternal, indestructible body” under the Indian Union.
The apex court said that “irrespective of which government represents the cause of the Union of India, Parliament’s cause is eternal, indivisible and indestructible” and that the government would have to stand by the amendment.
It began with Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who was part of a seven-judge Constitution bench hearing the question of AMU’s minority status, asking Mehta, appearing for the Centre, whether he accepted the 1981 amendment.
Expressing surprise, the CJI said, “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.”
He added, “And I can’t hear the Government of India say that an amendment which Parliament made is something I don’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.”
The solicitor-general said,“I am not arguing a matter of A versus B. I am before a seven-judge Constitution bench answering constitutional questions. The amendment in question was subjected to challenge before the high court and there is a judgment declaring that it is unconstitutional for ABCD grounds and as a law officer, it is my right as well as my entitlement and duty to say that this view appears to be correct”.
The reference was to the 2006 Allahabad High Court ruling that held the 1981 amendment unconstitutional. The Allahabad High Court had in January 2006 struck down the provision of the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981 by which the varsity was accorded minority status.
The CJI exclaimed, “This would be radical because a law officer would be then telling us that I don’t abide by what Parliament has done. You have to stand by what Parliament has done. Parliament is undoubtedly supreme in law making function. 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?”
The solicitor-general said he was supporting the 2006 judgment.