Article 30 in Constitution of India

 

Article 30 in Constitution of India

30. Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions

(1)All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

(1A)In making any law providing for the compulsory acquisition of any property of an educational institution established and administered by a minority, referred to in clause (1), the State shall ensure that the amount fixed by or determined under such law for the acquisition of such property is such as would not restrict or abrogate the right guaranteed under that clause.

(2)The state shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion or language.Editorial Comment - Article 30 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. All minorities, whether based on religion or language, have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. This includes the right to determine the type of institution, its affiliation, and the right to appoint staff. The state cannot discriminate against any educational institution on the grounds of its minority status while granting aid. Minority institutions should receive the same treatment and protection as institutions established by the majority.

While minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions, they must still adhere to reasonable regulations that the state may impose in the interest of maintaining standards of education, ensuring welfare, or preventing maladministration.

The purpose of Article 30 is to protect the educational rights of religious and linguistic minorities, allowing them to preserve and promote their distinct culture, language, and religious identity through educational institutions of their choice. It recognizes the importance of minority communities in the nation's diversity and provides them with the freedom to establish and manage educational institutions that cater to their specific needs and aspirations. Article 31(A) was added as part of the 42nd Constitutional Amendment which states that in case of any property acquired by the government of an educational institution then it is the duty of the government to give appropriate compensation.

In this case, St. Xavier's College v. State of Gujarat (1974), the Supreme Court clarified that minority educational institutions have the right to admit students belonging to their own community and can give preference to them while making admissions, as long as the admission process is fair and transparent.

In D.A.V. College, Jullundur v. State of Punjab (1971), the Supreme Court held that minority institutions have the right to appoint teachers of their choice, subject to their qualifications and suitability. It emphasized the importance of preserving the minority character of such institutions.

In this case, S.P. Mittal v. Union of India 1983, the court discussed Auroville, a township formed on the ideals of Sri Aurobindo. Tamil Nadu government took management of this township and filed a presidential ordinance which later on became The Auroville (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1980.

Seeing that the government took control of a ‘religious’ enterprise, the Constitutional validity of the Act was challenged on 4 grounds. One of the grounds was that it was violative of Article 29 and 30. It was held by the bench that the aforesaid Act does not violate Article 29 and 30. The court held that it, in no way curtailed their right or prevented any citizen from conserving its own language, script or culture and thus was not violative of Article 29.

Also in this case, in order to seek protection under Article 30, one must prove that they are a linguistic or religious minority and the institution in question was established by them. Considering that Auroville was not religious and was founded on the ideology of Sri Aurobindo, they could not seek protection under these articles.

In the landmark case T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002), the Supreme Court dealt with the autonomy of minority educational institutions and their right to establish and administer institutions of their choice. The Supreme Court held that minority institutions have the right to administer their affairs, including the right to appoint staff, but they must still operate within certain reasonable regulations imposed by the state.ReferencesIndianKanoonConstitutionofIndia.netBlog Ipleaders IndianKanoon[Editorial comment-The Constitution (Forty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, repealed Article 19 (1) (f) and also took out Article 31(1) has been taken out of Part III and made a separate Article 300A in Chapter IV of Part XII. This amendment may have taken away the scope of speedy remedy under Article 32 for the violation of Right to Property because it is no more a Fundamental Right. Making it a legal right under the Constitution serves two purposes: Firstly, it gives emphasis to the value of socialism included in the preamble and secondly, in doing so, it conformed to the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution. Also Refer]