SC-AMU 2 LAST

The varsity further said "Union of India cannot be The varsity further said "Union of India cannot bepermitted to withdraw its appeal on this ground. It is wellsettled by this Hon’ble Court that a decision taken at thegovernmental level will not be nullified by a change ofgovernment by another political party assuming powerparticularly when such a decision affects the interest of thenation as a whole." It said parliamentary democracy is part of the basicstructure of the Constitution and therefore it is the duty ofthe Executive to defend Parliament whenever and wherever anyAct of Parliament is challenged. "It is not open to the Central Government to question thevalidity of a law made by Parliament or to doubt the wisdom ofParliament in making the law; more so, before a court of law,"it said. The University said that apex court should appoint aneminent senior advocate as amicus curiae to assist it,considering the substantial questions of law of general publicimportance involved in the batch of appeals, including thecorrectness of Constitutional Bench judgment in Azeez Bashaversus Union of India case. It said that none of the facts mentioned by Centre arenew and all the facts were in the knowledge of the Union whenit had filed the present appeal before the apex Court in 2006. AMU said that in respect of other Universities, theGovernor/Lt Governor used to be the Chancellor but the varsitywas provided a special dispensation in 1920 in comparison toother State established universities which also shows its"unique minority character". The Allahabad High Court had in January 2006 struck downthe provision of the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1981 by which theuniversity was accorded minority status. AMU Act was enacted in 1920 dissolving and incorporatingMohammedan Anglo-Oriental (MAO) College. AMU (Amendment) Actin 1951 was passed by Parliament to do away with compulsoryinstruction in Muslim theology. The amendment openedmembership 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 AzizBasha. The SC dismissed the petition in 1967 holding that AMUwas not a minority institution because it had been establishedby an Act of Parliament and had not been set up by Muslims.PTI MNL SJK RKSARC

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here