http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 24  

PETITIONER: D. A. V. COLLEGE ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT05/05/1971

BENCH: REDDY, P. JAGANMOHAN BENCH: REDDY, P. JAGANMOHAN SIKRI, S.M. (CJ) MITTER, G.K. HEGDE, K.S. GROVER, A.N.

CITATION:  1971 AIR 1737            1971 SCR  688

ACT: Constitution  of India, Arts 29(1), 30(1), 19  and  14.-Guru Nanak University (Amritsar) Act (21 of 1969)-Sections  4(2), (3), 5, cls. 2(1) (a) 17 and 18 of Statutes-If violative  of the     constitutional    guarantees-Religious     minority, determination-Arya Samajis, if religious minority. Constitution  of  India, Art.  32-Questions  of  legislative competence, agitation of.

HEADNOTE: The Arya Samaj is a reformist movement, believes in one  God and  in the Vedas as. the books of true knowledge, It has  a distinct Organisation the membership of which is open to all those  who subscribe to its aims and objects.  It admits  to membership only those Hindus who Subscribe to the  decalogue and its beliefs in the cannons of Vedic interpretation  laid down  by its founder, but, all outsiders who are  non-Hindus must  undergo  a ceremony of purification or  Shudhi,  Under bye-law  32  of  the  Constitution of  the  Arya  Samaj  the proceedings of all meetings and sub-committees will have  to be  written in Arya Bhasha-In Hindi language  and  Devnagari character. The Dayanand Anglo Vedic College Trust, formed to perpetuate the  memory  of the founder of the Arya Samaj  runs  various institutions  in  the  Country.   The   petitioners-colleges managed  and  administered  by the Trust  and  the  Managing Society  were, before the Punjab Reorganisation  Act,  affi- liated  to  the  Punjab University  constituted  under  East Punjab Act 7 of 1947.  After the reorganisation of the State of  Punjab in 1969, the Punjab Legislature passed  the  Guru Nanak University (Amritsar) Act (21 of 1969) establishing  a University.  In exercise of the powers conferred by s. 5 the first  respondent  specified the districts in the  State  of Punjab  over which the University was to exercise its  power and notified the date on which the colleges in the areas  so specified  ceased to be affiliated to the Punjab  University and  were  to  be  associated  with  and  admitted  to   the privileges  of the new university.  Sub-section (2) of s.  4 of the Act enacted that the University "shall make provision for  study  and research on the life and teachings  of  Guru

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 24  

Nanak and their cultural and religious impact in the context of  Indian and World Civilisation; and sub-s.  (3)  enjoined the  University "to promote studies to provide for  research in Punjabi language and literature and to undertake measures for  the  development of Punjabi  language,  literature  and culture".  By cl. 2(1) (a) of the Statutes in Ch.  V, framed under  the  Act,  the  colleges  were  required  to  have  a regularly constituted governing body consisting of not  more than  20  persons approved by the  senate  including,  among others,  two  representatives  of  the  University  and  the principal of the College, ex officio.  Under Cl. (1) (3)  if these  requirements were not complied with  the  affiliation was  liable to be withdrawn.  By cl. 18 the staff  initially appointed  were  to be approved by the Vice  Chancellor  and subsequent changes had to be reported to the University  for the   Vice-Chancellor’s  approval.   And  by  cl.  18   non- government  colleges  were to comply with  the  requirements laid down in the ordinance governing service and conduct  of teachers. 689 In petitions filed under Art. 32 of the Constitution it  was contended  that the main object of the Act was to  propagate Sikh  religion and to promote Punjabi language in  Gurumukhi script and that since the petitioners institutions belonged to   a  minority  based  on  religion  and  language   their compulsory affiliation violated Arts. 29(1) and 30(1) of the Constitution.   In support of this it was submitted that  s. 5(3)  of  the Act and also cls. 2(1)(a), 17 and  18  of  the statutes  in  Ch.   V. interfered  with  the  management  of minority  institutions and therefore violated the  guarantee under   Art.  30;  that  the  statutory  affiliation   being compulsory  affected the petitioners freedom of  association guaranteed under Art. 19(1) (c); and that ss. 4(2) and  4(3) contravened Arts. 29(1) & 30(1) and was discriminatory.  The petitioners  further contended that in view of s. 72 of  the Reorganisation  Act the State Legislature was not  competent to  enact  s.  5 which empowered  the  State  Government  by notification  to compulsorily disaffiliate from  the  Punjab University all colleges including the colleges of minorities and  affiliate them to the new University.  The  respondents contended inter alia, that education being a State  subject, the  state legislature alone was competent to  legislate  in respect  of universities and that in any case in a  petition under  Art. 32 this Court could not go into the question  of legislative competence if the law that was impugned did  not in any way affect the fundamental rights of the petitioners. HELD:(1)  Whether  or not  ultimately  any  fundamental right  in fact is threatened or violated so long as a  prima facie  case  of  such a threat or violation is  made  out  a petition under Art. 32 must be entertained.  So long as  the petitioner makes out a prima facie case that his fundamental rights  are  affected or threatened he cannot  be  prevented from  challenging that the law complained of, which  affects or  invades  those  rights, is invalid because  of  want  of legislative  competence.. But the proposition that once  the petition is entertained, irrespective of whether it is found ultimately that the law has infringed the fundamental rights of  the  petitioners, the vires of the  legislation  or  the competence   of  the  legislature  to  enact  the   impugned legislation must be gone into and determined, is not  valid. If in fact, the law does not, even on the assumption that it is  valid, infringe any fundamental rights this  Court  will not  decide that question in a petition under Art. 32.   The reason is that no petition under Art. 32 will be entertained if  fundamental rights are not affected and if the  impugned

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 24  

law  does  not  affect the fundamental rights  it  would  be contrary to this principle to determine whether that law  in fact has legislative competence or not.  In the present case none  of  the  provisions  of the  Act  offend  any  of  the fundamental rights of the petitioners.  Therefore, it is not necessary to go into the question of legislative  competence or to decide upon the validity of s. 5. [713A-B ; 714H] Mohammad Yasin v. The Town Area Committee, Jalatabad z  Anr. [1952]  S.C.R. 572, Charanjitlal Chowdhury v. The  Union  of India  &  Ors., [1970] S.C.R. 869, Kyerbari Tea Co.  Ltd.  & Anr. v. State of Assam, [1964] 5 S.C.R. 975 and Saghir Ahmad v. State of U.P., [1955] S.C.R. 707, referred to. (2)A  reading  of Arts. 29(1) and 30(1)would lead  to  the conclusion  that  a religious or linguistic minority  has  a right  to establish and administer educational  institutions of  its  choice for effectively conserving  its  distinctive language  script or culture subject to the regulatory  power of  the  State and cl. (2) of Art. 29.  While  this  is  so, these  two articles are not inter-linked nor does it  permit of their being always read together. [695F] Rev.   Father  W. Proost & Ors. v. State of  Bihar  &  Ors., [1969] 2 S.C.R. 73, referred to. 44-1 S.C. India/71                             690 (3)Religious or linguistic minorities are to be determined only  in  relation to the particular  legislation  which  is sought  to  be impugned; if it is  State  Legislature  these minorities  have  to  be  determined  in  relation  to   the population  of  the State.  A linguistic  minority  for  the purpose  of  Art  30(1) is one which must at  least  have  a separate  spoken  language;  it is not  necessary  that  the language should also have distinct script. [697B] Re:  Kerala   Education  Bill,  1957,  [1959]  S.C.R.   995, referred to. (4)(a)   The  Arya  Samaj,  by  "rejecting  the   manifold absurdities found in Smriti and in tradition and in  seeking a  basis  in  the  early literature for  a  purer  and  more rational  faith" can be considered to be a  religious  mino- rity,  at any rate, as part of the Hindu religious  minority in the State of Punjab. [700D] (b)The  Arya Samajis have a distinct script of their  own, namely Devnagri. [701B] (5)The  Arya  Samajis  are entitled to  invoke  the  right guaranteed  by  Art. 29(1), because, they are a  section  of citizens  having  a distinct script; they  are  entitled  to invoke  Art. 30(1), because they are a  religious  minority. [701B] [In  view of the holding that Arya Samajis are  a  religious minority  the  Court did not find it necessary  to  consider whether they are a linguistic minority or whether they are a religious denomination.] [698G] (6)Clauses  2(1)  (a)  and 17 of Ch.  V  of  the  Statutes interfere  with  the  right of  the  religious  minority  to administer their educational institutions.  These provisions cannot  be made as conditions of affiliation non  compliance with which would involve disaffiliation; consequently,  they have to be struck down as offending Art. 30(1). [709B] Kerala  Education  Bill, 1957, [1959] S.C.R. 995,  and  Rev. Sidhajbhai  Sabhai v. State of Bombay, [1963] 3  S.C.R.  837 referred to. Rev.   Father W. Proost v. State of Bihar, [1969]  2  S.C.R. 73, held inapplicable. Clause  18  does not suffer from the same vice  as  cl.  17, because,  that  provision empowers the  University  to  make ordinances prescribing regulations governing the  conditions

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 24  

of service and conduct of teachers and these are enacted  in the  larger  interest  of the institution  to  ensure  their efficiency   and  excellence.   While  the  power  to   make ordinances  in  respect  of  the  matters  referred  to   is unexceptional  the nature of the infringement of the  right, if  any, under Art. 30(1) will depend on the actual  purpose and  import  of the ordinance when made, and the  manner  in which  it  is  likely to affect the  administration  of  the educational institution. [709C] (7)Assuming that the Punjab Legislature has the competence to enact the Act, sub-ss. (2) and (3) of s. 4 do not offend, by themselves, any of the rights under Arts. 29(1) &  30(1). [702A] (a)Sub-section  (2) merely indicates that  the  University can   institute  courses  of  study  or   provide   research facilities  for  any student of the  University  whether  he belongs to the majority or the minority community to  engage himself  in  such  study or research; but,  this  study  and research  on the life and teachings of Guru Nanak must be  a study  in relation to their culture and religious impact  in the  context of Indian and World civilizations.  To  provide for academic study of life and teaching or the 691 philosophy  or  culture  of  any great  saint  of  India  in relation   to  or  the  impact  on  the  Indian  and   World civilizations  cannot be considered as making provision  for religious instructions. [703G] (b)While  the State or the University has every  right  to provide  for the education of the, majority in the  regional medium, it is subject to the restrictions contained in Arts. 25 to 30.  Neither the University nor the State can provide for  imparting  education in a medium of  instruction  in  a language and script which stifles the language and script of any section ,of the citizens.  But sub-s. (3) does not  lend itself to the interpretation ,that the medium of instruction of all affiliated colleges has to be Punjabi.  The provision is  for  the promotion of Punjabi language,  literature  and culture.  Therefore, sub-section (3) does not transgress the guarantee under Art. 29(1). [704A-D] (c)The  facts  of the case do not attract  Art.  14.   The State  of  Punjab  is created as  a  unilingual  state  with Punjabi  as its language and if provision is made for  study of  punjabi  language that does not furnish  a  ground  .for discrimination  nor can the provision for the study  of  the life  and  teaching  of  Guru Nanak  afford  any  cause  for complaint, since, in neither case there is any compulsion on any  person  to undertake such studies; nor is .any  of  the communities  prohibited from pursuing studies in respect  of either  Hindi or the life and teachings of any Hindu  saint. [704F] (8)The notification under s. 5(3) compulsorily affiliating the colleges to the University does not contravene the right of freedom of Association ,guaranteed under Art. 19(1)  (c). Section  5 does not interfere with the D.A.V. College  Trust and Management Society by any attempt to form an Association with the University. [706B] All India Bank Employees Association v. National  Industrial Tribunal,  [1962]  2  S.C.R.  269  and  Raghubar  Dayal  Jai Prakash,  v. Union of India, [1963] 2 S.C.R.  547,  referred to. Smt.   Damayanti  Narang v. Union of India, *.P. No.  91  of 1964, dated 23-2-1971, distinguished.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 24  

JUDGMENT: ORIGINAL  JURISDICTION : Writ Petitions Nos. 256 to 268  and 271 of 1970. Petition  under Article 32 of the Constitution of India  for the enforcement of fundamental rights, A.K.  Sen, B. Datta, S. Swarup, J. B.  Dadachanji, O.  C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the petitioner (in W. P. No. 256 ,of 1970). Frank Anthony, B. Datta, S. Swarup, J. B.  Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur  and Ravinder Narain, for the petitioner in  (W.   P. No. 257 of 1970). B.Datta,  S. Swarup, J. B.  Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur  and Ravinder Narain, for petitioners (in W. P. Nos. 258 to  265, 267 and 268 of 1970) 692 Naunit  Lal, B. Datta, J. B.  Dadachanji, O. C.  Mathur  and Ravinder Narain, for the petitioners (in W. P. Nos. 266  and 271 of 1970). M.C.  Chagla,  R.  N. Sachthey  and  Harbans  Singh,  for respondent No. 1 (in W. P. No. 256 of 1970). H.L. Sibbal, Advocate-General, Punjab, R. N. Sachthey and Harbans  Singh,  for respondent No. 1 (in W. P. No.  257  of 1970). R.N. Sachthey and Harbans Singh, respondent No. 1 (in  W. P. No. 258to 268 and 271 of 1970). M.C.  Setalvad,  Hardev  Singh and Hira  Lal  Kapur,  for respondent No. 2 (in W. P. No. 256 of 1970). Hardev Singh and Hiralal Kapur, for respondent No. 2 (in W.   P. Nos. 257 to 268 and 271 of 1970). M.N.  Goswami and S. N. Mukherjee, for respondent  No.  3 (in W. P. No. 256 of 1970). The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.Jaganmohan Reddy, J.-These are fourteen Writ  Petitions by  various  Colleges managed and administered  by  Dayanand Anglo  Vedic  College  (D.  A. V.  College)  Trust  and  the Managing  Society, against the Respondents  challenging  the Constitutional validity of certain provisions of Guru  Nanak University, Amritsar, Act 21 of 1969 (hereinafter called the ’University’ or the ’Act’, as the context may permit) and in particular Sections 4, 4(2), 4(3) and 5 of the Act as  being violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (c) and (f), 26, 29 (1) and 30(1) of the Constitution of India.  There was also a prayer for  quashing the Notification No. 2201-4-RDI-70/7147  dated 16th  March 1970 issued under sub-section (1) of Section  5, by  the  first  Respondent, the State  of  Punjab  as  being illegal, unconstitutional and void.  As all these  petitions raised  a  common  question  as  to,  the  validity  of  the provisions  of  the  Act  the  Notification  issued  by  the Government  pursuant to that Act and certain  provisions  of the statutes made thereunder it would be sufficient if facts in Writ Petition No. 256 are set out. The  Managing Committee of the D. A. V. College is  composed of  24 members and manages a score of other D. A. V.  Insti- tutions  established in the Country.  The D. A.  V.  College Trust and the Managing Society was formed to perpetuate  the memory of Swami Dayanand Saraswati who was the founder of an organisation  known as Arya Samaj, which Organisation it  is claimed has a fixed religious programme and its constitution is designed, 693 to  perpetuate the religious teaching and philosophy of  its founder.  The Arya Samaj it is stated has its own philosophy conception of God worship, religious tenets, rituals, social work,  educational  work  etc., as  would  appear  from  the Constitution  of  the Arya Samaj.  It is  therefore  claimed

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 24  

that  it  being  a religious sect  and  denomination,  is  a minority  within  the  meaning  of  Article  30(1)  of   the Constitution.  These Schools and Colleges were established ’ on  the  lines teachings and principles of  Arya  Samaj’  in which  ’the  imparting of the vedic  culture  and  religious instructions and worship based on the concept of Vedas,  was and has its essential ingredient’. The  Institutions which have filed the Writ  Petitions  were before the Punjab Reorganisation Act (hereinafter called the ’Reorganisation  Act’) affiliated to the  Punjab  University constituted under the East Punjab Act 7 of 1947 (hereinafter called  the  ’Punjab University’ or the  ’Punjab  University Act’ as the context admits).  Before the partition of  India some  of  these Institutions were affiliated to  the  Punjab University, Lahore.  After the partition other  Universities were set up in Punjab State like the Punjabi University, the Kurukshetra  University, the Agricultural  University  etc., each of which had its own territorial jurisdiction. There being a strong movement in the State of Punjab by  the Sikhs  to have a State of their own and others who  did  not want  it,  the  Government of India being  faced  with  this problem ultimately decided to reorganise the State of Punjab on  linguistic basis.  A Boundary Commission  was  appointed under  the Chairmanship of Shah, J., as he then was, and  on the  basis of that report Parliament ultimately  passed  the Reorganisation  Act by and under which the State of  Punjab and  the  State of Haryana were formed  and  certain  ,other territories were added to Himachal Pradesh.  Chandigarh, the erstwhile  Capital  was to be a Union territory and  was  to serve as Capital of both these States.  A provision was made in this Act for the continuance of certain Corporations  and Institutions  which  had served the needs of the  people  of both areas to continue as heretofore subject to the  special provisions  enacted in the Act.  Three of such  institutions were   the  Punjab  University,  the   Punjab   Agricultural University and the Board constituted under the provisions of Part III of Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925.  The continuance of the aforementioned  two Universities was dealt along with  other statutory   Corporations   under  the   general   provisions contained  in  Section  72 of the  Reorganisation  Act.   As already pointed out at the time of the reorganisation of the State other Universities other than the University of Punjab were  in existence namely the Punjabi University in  Punjab, and   Kurukshetra   University  in   Haryana.    After   the reorganisation the various Colleges which were in the (1)  [1969] 2 S. C. R. 73. 694 State  of  Punjab other than those over  which  the  Punjabi University had jurisdiction were continued to be  affiliated to the Punjab University.  While this was the position  till 1969 the Punjab Legislature in order to mark the 500th Birth anniversary   of  Shri,  Guru  Nanak  Devji  established   a University  to  perpetuate his name.  The Act  received  the assent of the Governor on 28th November 1969,.  On the  16th March  1970 the first Respondent in exercise of  the  powers conferred  on it by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the  Act specified  the Districts of Amritsar,  Gurdaspur,  Jullundur and  Kapurthala in the State of Punjab as the area in  which the  University  shall exercise its power  and  perform  its duties.  It further notified on 16th March 1970 in  exercise of  the powers under subsection (3) of Section 5, 30th  June 1970 as the date for the purpose of the said sub-section  in respect of the educational institutions situated within  the limits  of the aforesaid area, which meant that as and  from that  date the Colleges in the areas specified  above  which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 24  

were  affiliated  to  the Punjab  University  ceased  to  be affiliated  to  that  University  and  were  deemed  to   be associated  with  and  admitted to  the  privileges  of  the University. The  contentions urged before us are that the  main  purpose and   object  of  the  University  as  constituted  by   the University  Act  is to propagate Sikh religion  and  promote Punjabi   language  in  Gurmukhi  script,  that  since   the Petitioners  institutions  belong  to a  minority  based  on religion and language, in that they being adherents of  Arya Samaj Sect and denomination their compulsory affiliation  to the  University  violates  Article 29(1) and  30(1)  of  the Constitution  of India.  In support of this main  contention it  is  submitted  that Section 5(3) of  the  Act  and  also clauses  2(1)  (a), 17 and 18 of the statutes in  Chapter  V which  inter-alia  interfere  with  the  management  of  the minority institutions are ultra-vires being violative of the guarantee  under Article 30(t).  It is also  contended  that the  minority educational institutions have the  freedom  to choose to which University they will be affiliated and  that the legislature cannot compel affiliation to any  particular University.   In  any  case in view of  Section  72  of  the Reorganisation  Act it is the Central Government which  must determine   whether  Colleges  affiliated  to   the   Punjab University  can  be disaffiliated  before  any  Notification under  the Act can be issued specifying the areas  in  which educational  institutions are to be affiliated and  admitted to  the  privileges  of  the University  as  from  the  date notified.    On   this  view  it  is  submitted   that   the notification of the 16th March ’70 is bad and must be struck down.  It is also submitted that this statutory  affiliation being  compulsory  affects  the  Petitioners  right  of  As- sociation  guaranteed under Art. 19(1) (c) and that  Article 14 is contravened because section 4(2) and 4(3) discriminate against the Hindus, for while providing for the study of the teachings of Guru 695 Nanak  and  the  encouragement of the  Punjabi  language  no provision is made for the study of the religion or teachings of the Hindus or of their language-the Hindi. Now  the question is, have the Petitioners been  established and  administered  by a religious  or  linguistic  minority, having  a distinct script or culture of its own  within  the meaning of Articles 29(1) and 30(1) of the Constitution  and do the provisions of the Act or any statute or ordinance  or Notification  made  thereunder  offend  any  of  the  rights guaranteed  to  them.   This in turn  leads  to  an  enquiry whether  the  Arya Samaj Sect is a religious  or  linguistic minority.  Article 29(1) and 30(1) are as follows :-               29(1)-Any Section of the citizens residing  in               the  territory  of India or any  part  thereof               having a distinct language, script or  culture               of  its own shall have the right  to  conserve               the same.               30(1)-All   minorities,   whether   based   on               religion or language, shall have the right  to               establish    and    administer     educational               institutions of their choice. It will be observed that Article 29(1) is wider than Article 30(1), in that. while any Section of the citizens  including the  minorities,  can  invoke the  rights  guaranteed  under Article 29(1), the rights guaranteed under Article 30(1) are only  available  to  the minorities  based  on  religion  or language.  It is not necessary for Article 30(1)  that   the minority  should be both a religious minority as well  as  a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 24  

linguistic  minority.  It is sufficient if it is one or  the other  or  both.  A reading of these two  Articles  together would  lead  us to conclude that a religious  or  linguistic minority has a right to establish and administer educational institutions  of its choice for effectively  conserving  its distinctive language, script or culture, which right however is  subject  to  the  regulatory  power  of  the  State  for maintaining   and   facilitating  the  excellence   of   its standards.   This right is further subject to clause (2)  of Article  29 which provides that no citizen shall  be  denied admission   into  any  educational  institution   which   is maintained by the State or receives aid out of State  funds, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them.   While this is so these two articles are  not  inter- linked  nor  does  it  permit of  their  being  always  read together. In  Rev.  Father W. Proost & Ors. v. State of Bihar  &  Ors. where while conceding that the Jesuits of Ranchi who were  a religious  minority established the  petitioner  Institution the  St.  Xaviers College which was  admitting  students  of other  communities also, the Attorney General had  contended that as the protection to 696 minorities  in Article 29(1) is only a right to  conserve  a distinct language, script or culture of its own the  College did not qualify for the protection of Article 30(1)  because (i)  it  was not founded to conserve them, and (ii)  it  was open to all sections of people.  An attempt was made to read into  the  protection granted by Article 30(1)  a  corollary taken  from Article 29(1).  While conceding that the  Jesuit community  is  a minority community based  on  religion  and therefore  it  has  a  right  to  establish  and  administer educational  institutions  of its choice, it  was  contended that  as  the protection to minorities in Article  29(1)  is only  a right to conserve the distinct language,  script  or culture  of  its own, the College does not qualify  for  the protection  of  Article 30(1) because it is not  founded  to conserve   them.    Hidayatullah,  C.   J.,   rejected   the interpretation  sought  to be placed on  Article  29(1)  and 30(1)  as if they have to be read together.  At page  80  he said :               "In  our opinion, the width of  Article  30(1)               cannot  be  cut  down  by  introducing  in  it               considerations  on which Art. 29(1) is  based.               The  latter  article is a  general  protection               which is given to minorities to conserve their               language, script or culture.  The former is  a               special  right  to  minorities  to   establish               educational  institutions  of  their   choice.               This  choice  is not limited  to  institution,               seeking   to  conserve  language,  script   or               culture  and the choice is not taken  away  if               the  minority community having established  an               educational  institution  of its  choice  also               admits members of other communities.  That  is               a circumstance irrelevant for the  application               of  Article 30(1) since no such limitation  is               expressed  and none can be implied.   The  two               articles create two separate rights,  although               it  is possible that they may meet in a  given               case." The  next  question  is  what  constitutes  a  religious  or linguistic minority and how is it to be determined ? It  was submitted  that in Re.  Kerala Education Bill 1957 (1)  this Court  did  not in fact lay down any test  for  ascertaining

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 24  

what  is  meant  by minority community or how it  is  to  be ascertained  because  in  that  case  it  had  assumed  that question (2) itself proceeded on the footing that there were minorities  in  Kerala who are entitled to the  rights  con- ferred under Article 30(1).  No doubt to some extent this is true.  Das, C. J., had observed at page 1050 that  "strictly speaking  for answering question (2) we need not enquire  as to  what  a  minority community means or how  is  it  to  be ascertained".   Nonetheless  earlier he did  consider  these matters (vide pages 1047-1050) and laid down the  principles which  govern  it, including an examination of  the  figures relating to the total population of the Kerala (1)  [1959] S. C. R. 995. 697 State and the population of the minorities, the  Christians, the Muslim and the Anglo Indians. Though there was a faint attempt to canvas the position that religious  or linguistic minorities should be minorities  in relation  to  the entire population of the country,  in  our view  they  are  to be determined only in  relation  to  the particular  legislation  which  is sought  to  be  impugned, namely that if it is the State legislature these  minorities have  to be determined in relation to the population of  the State.  On this aspect Das, C. J., in Kerala Education  Bill case  speaking  for the majority thought that  there  was  a fallacy  in  the  suggestion  that  a  minority  or  Section envisaged  Article 30(1) and Article 29(1) could  mean  only such  persons  as constitute numerically,  minority  in  the particular  region  where the  educational  institution  was situated  or  resided under local  authority.   He  however, thought, it was not necessary to express a final opinion  as to whether education being the subject matter of item 11  of the State list, subject only to the provisions of entry  62, 63,  64  and  66 of List I and entry 25  of  List  III,  the existence   of   a  minority  ,community   should   in   all circumstances and for purposes of all laws of that State  be determined on the basis of the population of the whole State or  whether it should be determined on the said  basis  only when  the validity of a law extending to the whole State  is in question or whether it should be determined on the  basis of  a population of a locality when the law under  that  Act applies only to that locality, because in that case the Bill before  the  Court  extended to the whole of  the  State  of Kerala  and consequently the minority must be determined  by reference to the entire population of that State. It  is undisputed, and it was also conceded by the State  of Punjab,  that the Hindus of Punjab are a religious  minority in  the State though they may not be so in relation  to  the entire country.  The claim of Arya Samaj to be a  linguistic minority  was however contested.  A linguistic minority  for the purpose of Article 30(1) is one which must at least have a  separate spoken language.  It is not necessary that  that language  should also have a distinct script for  those  who speak  it  to be a linguistic minority.  There are  in  this country  some languages which have no script of  their  own, but nonetheless those sections of the people who speak  that language  will  be  a linguistic minority  entitled  to  the protection of Article 30(1). The Punjab Boundry Commission Report under the  Chairmanship of  Shah, J. as he then was dealt not only with the  several scripts  in  use  but  also the  language  of  the  dominant sections   residing   in   Punjab.    Earlier   the   States Reorganisation Report also went into the question and  noted the controversies between Akali Dal sponsoring Punjabi  with Gurmukhi script and Hindus who while

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 24  

698 at home they speak Punjabi asserted that in their  religious ceremonies and festivals, in their Schools and Colleges they use Hindi. in any case they never accepted Gurmukhi  script. At page 143, it was observed "The problem of language in the Punjab  is therefore primarily one of scripts ; and in  this battle of scripts; sentiment is arrayed against  sentiment". This  matter  was  dealt with in somewhat  great  detail  in Shah’s report at page 2 and 3 :               "History  of the language controversy  in  the               Punjab is over fifty years old.  In the Punjab               of  pre-British days, the Court  language  was               Persian,  and  Punjabi was  almost  invariably               written  in  the Persian  script.   Under  the               British  rule,  Urdu was the language  of  the               Courts  and  of  district  administration   in               addition to English.  During the last  decades               of  the  19th  Century  two  important  social               reform movements gained strong foothold in the               Punjab.   The  Arya Samaj movement  took  hold               among  the urban Hindu population and  use  of               Hindi  in the Devnagri script was  propagated.               After  Swami  Dayanand, founder  of  the  Arya               Samaj   movement,  published  his   ’Satyarath               Prakash’  in  the  eyes of a  section  of  the               Hindus  the  Hindi language and  the  Devnagri               script acquired religious, significance.  Dur-               ing the same period, the cause of Punjabi  was               espoused  by  the Chief  Khalsa  Dewan.   They               published   a  large,  number  of  books   and               pamphlets dealing with the lives of Gurus  and               diverse  facets of the Sikh  religion.   These               books were written in Punjabi and in  Gurmukhi               script  which had been given its present  form               by the second Guru of the Sikhs, and in  which               the  holy  Granth is  written.   The  language               issue in course of time got linked up with the               politics of the province.  Demands for  giving               better status in the administrative scheme  to               Punjabi  in  Gurmukhi  script  and  Hindi   in               Devnagri  script  gained  strength,  and   the               Government  of  the day agreed  to  accede  to               those  demands  and recognised the  status  of               both  Punjabi  and Hindi  in  the  educational               curricula". In  our  view  it is unnecessary to  consider  whether  Arya Samajis  are a linguistic minority, because if they  can  be considered to be a religious minority they will be  entitled to invoke the protection under Article 30(1). For the purposes of Article 29(1) even though it may not  be necessary  to  enquire whether all the Hindus of  Punjab  as also  the  Arya Samajis speak Hindi as  a  spoken  language, nonetheless,  there can be no doubt that the script  of  the Arya Samajis is distinct from that of the Sikhs who form the majority.  It is claimed that while the Sikhs have  Gurmukhi as  their  script the Arya Samajis. have  their  own  script which is the Devnagri script.  Their claim 699 to  be  written  in  Arya Bhasha-  in  Hindi  languages  and Devnagri  character.   All Aryas and Arya  Sabhasads  should know Arya Bhasha, Hindi or Sanskrit.  The belief is that the name  of  the  script  Devnagri is  derived  from  Deva  and therefore  has divine origin.  From what has been stated  it is  clear  that the Arya Samajis have a distinct  script  of their own, namely Devnagri.  They are therefore entitled  to

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 24  

invoke  the  right guaranteed under Article 29  (1)  because they are a section of citizens having a distinct script  and under  Article  30 (1) because of their  being  a  religious minority. It is now to be ascertained whether any of the provisions of the Act, statutes or Ordinances offend the guaranteed rights of  the  petitioners.   The petitioners  contend  that  sub- sections  (2)  and (3) of Section 4  directly  infringe  the fundamental  rights guaranteed under Article 29 (1)  and  30 (1)  of the Constitution.  Under these provisions  the  Arya Samaj through its educational institutions have the right to conserve its script, culture and its language. Sub-section  (2)  of  the  Act, it  is  submitted  enacts  a provision  for  making it imperative to  study  and  conduct research  on the life and teachings of Guru Nanak and  their cultural   and   religious  impact  on  Indian   and   World civilizations   while  sub-section  (3)   contemplates   the adopting  of  measures  for the study  of  Punjabi  language literature  and  culture which provisions according  to  the petitioners  directly  aim at strangulating  the  growth  of Hindi  while  encouraging  the  growth  of  Punjabi.   Their apprehension  is that Punjabi with Gurmukhi script  will  be made  the sole medium of instruction in the  University  and that  all  Colleges  affiliated to this  University  may  be forced to impart education through that medium. The  State  of  Punjab  in  its  counter  denied  that   the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 4 seek  to strangulate  the development and growth of  Hindi  language. It is stated that there is nothing in these provisions which offends  the religious susceptibilities of  the  Petitioners nor  can the provision for the promotion of and research  in Punjabi  language,  literature and culture in the  State  of Punjab,  which  has as its declared policy the  adoption  of Punjabi  as the sole language of the Punjabi speaking  area, be construed as offending the rights of the minorities. The second Respondent the University traversed the  Petitio- ners  allegations on grounds similar to those taken  by  the State  of  Punjab  except that it was  further  stated  that Respondent 3 the University of Punjab has also set up a Guru Nanak  Chair and that the Punjab Government has  offered  to set  up Guru Nanak Chairs in the Universities  of  Calcutta, Dharwar,  Madras, Kurushetra, Bombay as also in  the  Khalsa College, Amritsar.               700               the Vedas................. but be it noted  to               the   Vedas   as  interpreted,  not   by   the               traditional scholarship of Indian orthodoxy or               by  the critical scholarship of the West,  but               by   the   scholarship  of  the   Arya   Samaj               alone............  The scripture basis of  the               Arya Samaj then, while formally the Vedas,  is               in  reality  a certain interpretation  of  the               Vedas,  which is not recognized as  legitimate               by a single Sanskrit scholar, either Indian or               European, outside of the Arya Samaj Shri  Motilal Setalvad learned advocate for the  respondents contends  that  there is nothing to indicate that  the  Arya Samajis  should be Hindus.  This argument however  overlooks the basic tenets of the Sect in that it admits to membership only  those  Hindus who subscribe to the decalogue  and  its beliefs in the cannons of vedic interpretation laid down  by Swami Dayanand but all outsiders who are non-Hindus such  as Muslim   and   Christians  must  undergo   a   ceremony   of purification or Shudhi. The  passages  read above show beyond doubt  that  the  Arya

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 24  

Samaj by "rejecting the manifold absurdities found in  Smrti and  in  tradition  and  in seeking a  basis  in  the  early literature  for  a  purer and more rational  faith"  can  be considered  to be a religious minority, at any rate as  part of the Hindu religious minority in the State of Punjab. It was also sought to be contended by the petitioners  advo- cate that they are a religious denomination for the purposes of  protection  under  Article  26 (a).   It  is  true  that Mukherjea, J., as he then was in, The Commissioner of  Hindu Religious  Endowments,  Madras v.  Sri  Lakshmindra  Thirtha Swamiar  of  Shirur Mutt (1) after referring to  the  Oxford Dictionary  for the meaning of religious denomination as  "a collection  of individuals classed together under  the  same name :  a religious sect or body having a common faith  and Organisation and designated by a distinctive name" held that different  sects  or sub-castes can certainly  be  called  a religious denomination as it is designated by a  distinctive name-has  a common faith and common spiritual  organization. This  may be so but in the view we have taken that the  Arya Samaj  is  a religious minority, we find it  unnecessary  to determine whether it is also a religious denomination, as it does not arise for consideration under Article 30 (1). Now  coming to the question whether the Arya Samajis have  a distinct   script   of  their  own  bye-law  32   of   their Constitution shows that the proceedings of all meetings  and sub-committees will have (1)  [1954] S.C.R.1005.                             701 to be a religious minority with distinct script of their own seems  to  us  to  be justified as  would  appear  from  the following : The Arya Samaj is a reformist movement, believes in one  God and  in the Vedas as the books of true knowledge.  It  holds that  it is the duty of every Arya Samaj to read  the  Vedas and  have them read, to teach or preach them to others.   It has a distinct Organisation, the membership of which is open to  all  those who subscribe to its aims and  objects.   The Arya  Samajis  worship before the vedic fire and  it  begins with   the  burning  of  incence  (the   homa   ’sacrifice’) accompanied by the chanting of the Vedic verses. Encyclopaedia  Britannica-(Vol.   II-1968) has this  to  say about Arya Samaj at page 558 :               "Arya  Samaji, a vigorously reforming Sect  of               modern  Hinduism,  founded in  1875  by  Swami               Dayanand  Saraswati  (1824-83) at  Bombay  The               Vedas  as interpreted by the method laid  down               by Dayanand may be said to be the theology  of               the  Arya  Samaj and are held to  contain  all               truth  and all knowledge, including the  basis               for   modern  science.   The  Arya  Samaj   is               completely  opposed  to idolatry,  is  sternly               monothistic   and  denies  the   efficacy   of               priestly  intervention.  Its organization  and               services        are  strongly  reminiscant  of               ProtestantismThe  Arya  Samaj  opposes  the               caste system based upon birth,as un-vedic and               insists that caste should reflect meritThe               Arya  Samaj  has  sought to  revitalize  Hindu               life and to instill  self-confidence       and               national pride amongHindus.      It       has               established a network of excellent Schools and               Colleges,  including the Dayanand  Anglo-Vedic               College  in Lahore, which teach rigorously  in               the Vedas and in modern sciences               To  show the affinity between Arya  Samaj  and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 24  

             Protestantism  a  comparison is  made  in  the               Encyclopaedia  of Religion and Ethics  between               Dayanand  Saraswati  and  Martin  Luther.   In               Volume 2 at page 58-59, it is said :               "As Luther the German monk was a child of  the               European Renaissance, so Dayanand the  Gujrati               monk  was a child of the  Indian  Renaissance.               Luther  attacked indulgences,  while  Dayanand               attacked  idolatry.  Luther appealed from  the               Roman church and the authority of tradition to               the scriptures of the Old and New  Testaments.               Swami  Dayanand appealed from the  Brahmanical               Church  and  the  authority of  Smrti  to  the               earliest and most sacred of Indian Scriptures.               The  watchword  of  Luther was  ’Back  to  the               Bible’; the watchword of Dayanand was ’back to 702 Assuming for the moment that the Punjab Legislature had  the competence  to  enact  the  Act,  about  which  considerable argument was addressed before us particularly in respect  of the scope and ambit of Section 72 of the Reorganisation Act- sub-section (2) and (3)  of  Section  4 do not in  our  view offend by themselves any of the    rights of the petitioners either under Art. 29 (1) or Art. 30 (1) of the Constitution. Sub-section (2) & (3) of Section 4 are as follows : Section  4.-The  University  shall  exercise  the  following powers and perform the following duties:               (1)...............................               (2)To make provision for study and research               on  the life and teachings of Guru  Nanak  and               their  cultural  and religious impact  in  the               context of Indian and World civilizations ;               (3)To   promote  studies  to  provide   for               research  in Punjabi language  and  literature               and to undertake measures for the  development               of Punjabi language, literature and culture. It  will be seen from the language of sub-section  (2)  that nowhere   is  there  a  mandate  for   compelling   Colleges affiliated to it either to study the religious teachings  of Guru Nanak or to adopt in any way the culture of the Sikhs. Guru Nanak is the founder of the Sikh religion.  His  teach- ings were inspired by a need to synthesis the essentials  of the   Hindu   and   Mohamadan  faith   which   were   always irreconcilable, by preaching that in no essentials of  faith did they differ.  His was intensly a montheistic philosophy of  the  unit  of God  largely  directed  against  idolatory hypocracy distinction of castes, creeds and the  pretentions of  priest  craft.  He was an inspired soul  from  his  very childhood, travelled widely and his pilgrimages extended  to Mecca and Madina.  If the University makes provision for  an academic study and research of the life and teachings of any saint  it  cannot on any reasonable view  be  considered  to require   Colleges   affiliated   to   the   University   to compulsorily study his life and teachings or to do  research in them.  The impugned provision would merely indicate  that the  University  can institute courses of study  or  provide research  facilities  for  any  student  of  the  University whether he belongs to the majority or the minority community to  engage  himself  in such study or  research  but  be  it remembered  that  this study and research on  the  life  and teachings  of the Guru Nanak must be a study in relation  to their culture and religious impact 703 in  the contact of Indian and world civilizations  which  is mostly an academic and philosophical study.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 24  

it is however contended that as the Guru Nanak University is wholl y,  maintained  out of the State funds  the  provision under  4(2)  .,offends Article 28(1) which is not  saved  by clause 2 thereof.  The ,petitioners pointed out that Section 23(1) of the Act enjoins on the State Government to  provide from time to time ’such amounts by way of grants for meeting the   capital,  recurring  or  other  expenditure   of   the University as it may deem fit’ and at any rate require it to provide  a  minimum  annual grant of Rs.  50  lakhs  to  the University  for meeting its recurring  expenditure  provided that  if during any financial year the entire amount of  the aforesaid  grant is not utilized for meeting  the  recurring expenditure  the  unutilized balance may with  the  previous consent  of  the State Government be  utilised  for  meeting capital  expenditure of the University.  Neither  the  State Government  nor the University in their counter denied  this allegation  and even in the counter filed during the  course of the hearing by the State of Punjab nothing was stated  to controvert  the  assertion  that the  University  is  wholly maintained  out  of State funds.  During the course  of  the arguments  however learned Advocate appearing on  behalf  of the State and the University suggested that this was not  so because the University gets income from affiliation fees and examination  fees  as  such  it  cannot  be  said  that  the University is wholly maintained out of State funds.  We  can only  say  that this was not a serious attempt to  deny  the averment.    The  income  from  affiliation  fees  and   the examination  fees  as  the term ’fee’  itself  indicates  is something  that  is  charged for rendering  the  service  in respect of those two items which is a sort of quid-pro  ,quo and could hardly be said to be an income for the purposes of running the University. Even so the Petitioners have still to make out that  Section 4(2)  implies that religious instruction will be given.   We think that such a contention is too remote and divorced from the object of the provision.  Religious instruction is  that which  is imparted for inculcating the tenets, the  rituals, the  observances,  ceremonies  and modes  of  worship  of  a particular  Sect or denomination.  To provide  for  academic study of life and teaching or the philosophy and culture  of any great saint of India in relation to or the impact on the Indian  and  world  civilizations cannot  be  considered  as making provision for religious instructions. Sub-Section  (3)  of  Section 4 also does not  in  our  view transgress  the guarantee under Article 29(1).  Whether  one may  like it or not, linguistic States in this country  have come  to stay.  The purpose and object of  these  linguistic states is to provide with 704 greater facility the development of the people of that  area educationally,  socially and culturally, in the language  of that region but while the State or the University has  every right  to provide for the education of the majority  in  the regional medium, it is subject to the restrictions contained in  Article 25 to 30.  Neither the University nor the  State can   provide  for  imparting  education  in  a  medium   of instruction  in  a  language and script  which  stifles  the language and script of any Section of the citizens.  Such  a course will trespass on the rights of those Sections of  the citizens which have a distinct language or script and  which they   have   a  right  to  conserve   through   educational institutions  of their own.  In our view Section  4(3)  does not  lend  itself to the interpretation that the  medium  of instruction  of all affiliated Colleges has to  be  Punjabi. The  provision, as we construe it, is for the  promotion  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 24  

Punjabi  studies and research in and the development of  the Punjabi  language, literature and culture which is far  from saying  that the University can under that provision  compel the  affiliated Colleges particularly those of the  minority to  give instruction in the Punjabi language or in  any  way impede  the  right  to conserve their  language  script  and culture. It  is again contended that while provision is made in  Sec- tions  4(2) and 4(3) for the study and research of the  life and  teachings  of Guru Nanak and for the study  of  Punjabi language, script and literature no similar provision is made for the study, of religious Heads of Hindus or for the study of   Hindi  and  Devnagri  script  though  Hindus   form   a substantial  portion of the population of the State.   These provisions  therefore  are discriminatory and  violative  of Article  14 of the Constitution.  This argument in our  view is  devoid  of merit.  The State of Punjab is created  as  a unilingual  State  with  Punjabi  as  its  language  and  if provision  is made for study of Punjabi language  that  does not  furnish  a  ground  for  discrimination  nor  can   the provision for study of the life and teachings of Guru  Nanak afford any cause for complaint as in neither case as we have noticed, is there any compulsion on any person to  undertake such  studies nor is any of the communities prohibited  from pursuing  studies in respect of either Hindi or of the  life and teachings of any Hindu Saint.  The facts of the case  in our view do not attract Article 14. It  is  contended  that the compulsory  affiliation  of  the Petitioners  to  the University  affects  their  fundamental right of freedom of Association as guaranteed under  Article 19(1)  (e),  therefore the notification under  Section  5(3) affiliating them to the University is bad.  It is also urged that  since the words "associated with and admitted  to  any privileges"  or used in Section 5 of the Act, it would  mean that Petitioners are compulsorily formed into an Association with  the University.  This contention however is  countered by  the  Respondents  who  point out  that  the  freedom  of Association under 705 Article 19(1) (c) implies Association between citizens while in the case of the Petitioners what is sought to be affected is  an affiliation with the University which is a  corporate body. The  right  to  form an  association  implies  that  several individuals get together and form voluntarily an association with a common aim legitimate purpose and having a  community of  interests.   It  was sought to  be  suggested  that  the compulsory affiliation with the University affects the  aims and  objects  of  the Association, as such  its  freedom  is infringed.  There is in our view a fallacy in this  argument which  on earlier occasions had also been repelled.  In  the All India Bank Employees Association v. National  Industrial Tribunal  &  Ors.  (1),  it  was  observed  that  the  right guaranteed under Article 19(1) (c) does not carry with it  a concomitant right that the Associations shall achieve  their object such that any interference in such achievement by any law  would be unconstitutional unless it could be  justified under  Art. 19(4) as being in the interests of public  order or  morality.   The right under Article  19(1)  (c)  extends inter alia to the formation of an Association or Union. In  Raghubar Dayal Jai Prakash v. Union of India & Ors.  (2) it  was held that if the statute imposes conditions  subject to  which alone recognition could be accorded or  continued, "it is a little difficult to see how the freedom to form the Association  is  effected unless, of  course,  that  freedom

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 24  

implies  or involves a guaranteed right to recognition  also which it did not". A  reference has been made to a recent case of  Smt.   Dama- yanti Narang v. Union of India & Ors. (3), that a compulsory affiliation  by  statute would interfere with the  right  of Association.  This argument in our view is untenable because in that case Parliament passed a law under entry 63 of  List II  of Schedule VII to the Constitution under which a  Hindi Sammelan  was to be constituted which was to consist of  the first  members  of the Hindi Sammelan registered  under  the Societies  Registration  Act  and  all  persons  who  become members thereof in accordance with the rules in that behalf. This statutory Sammelan was constituted as a body  corporate the  first members of which were to consist of  persons  who immediately  before the appointed day were life  members  of the  Society  had been President’s of the  Society  or  were awarded the Mangla Prasad Paritoshik by the Society.   There were  also  other  provisions by which  the  Hindi  Sammelan Society,  its  constitution  as well  as  its  property  was affected.  In those circumstances it (1) [1962] 2 S.C.R. 269. (2) [1963] 2 S.C.R,547. (3) Writ Petition No. 91 of 1964, decided on 23-2-71. 45-1 S. C. India/71 706 was  held that the Act in so far as it interferes  with  the composition  of  the Society in  constituting  the  Sammelan violated  the rights of the original members of the  Society to form an Association guaranteed under Art. 19(1) (c).   No such thing was intended or effected by Section 5 of the Act. At  any  rate  the D. A. V.  College  Trust  and  Management Society is not being interfered with, by any attempt to form an   Association  with  the  University.   We  can  see   no infringement of Article 19(1) (c). The next ground of attack is in respect of the statutes made in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section (1) of Section  19  of the University Act which  according  to  the petitioners   interferes  with  the  management   of   their institutions   as  such  violates  Article  30(1)   of   the Constitution.  The relevant impugned statutes are  contained in  Chapter V relating to admission to Colleges.  These  are 2(1) (a) 17, and 18 read with clause 1(2) and (3) which  are as follows               1(1)               1(2)  Colleges  shall be of two  types  namely               University Colleges and affiliated Colleges.               1(3) The educational institutions and Colleges               situated   in  the  Districts   of   Amritsar,               Jullundur,   Gurdaspur  and  Kapurthalla   are               deemed  to be associated with and admitted  to               the  privileges of the University with  effect               from   30th   day   of   June   1970.    These               institutions shall observe the conditions  for               admission to the privileges of the  University               failing  which  the rights  conferred  may  be               withdrawn.               2(1)(a)  A College applying for  admission  to               the privileges of the University shall send  a               letter  of  application to the  Registrar  and               shall satisfy the Senate               (a)that the College shall have a  regularly               constituted  governing body consisting of  not               more  than 20 persons approved by  the  Senate               and including, among others, 2 representatives               of  the  University and the Principal  of  the               College Ex-officio.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 24  

             Provided  that  the said condition  shall  not               apply  in the case of Colleges  maintained  by               Government   which  shall  however   have   an               advisory Committee consisting of among  others               the principal of the College (Ex-officio)  and               two representatives of the University.               17.The  staff initially appointed shall  be               approved   by   the  Vice   Chancellor.    All               subsequent  changes shall be reported  to  the               University for Vice Chancellor’s approval.               707               In  the  case  of  trading  institutions   the               teach&,  pupil  ratio shall not be  less  than               112.   Non-Government  Colleges  shall  comply               with  the requirements laid down in the  ordi-               nance   governing  service  and   conduct   of               teachers in non-Government Colleges as may  be               framed by the University.               18.Non-Government  Colleges  shall   comply               with   the  requirements  laid  down  in   the               ordinances  governing service and  conduct  of               teachers in non-Government Colleges as may  be               framed by the University. It  is  contended that these provisions interfere  with  the Petitioners in the management of their institutions, in that the Colleges are required to constitute a regular  governing body  for  each of them, of not more than 20 persons  to  be approved   by   the  University  Senate.   Of   these,   two representatives  of the University and the Principal of  the College  are  to be ex-officio members.   According  to  the Petitioners  the Managing Committee of their institution  is composed of 24 members under the D. A. V. College Trust  and Management   Society   registered   under   the    Societies Registration Act (Act 21 of 1960).  It will be observed that under clause 1(3) if the petitioners do not comply with  the requirements  under l(a) their affiliation is liable  to  be withdrawn.   Similarly  it  is stated that  clause  17  also interferes  with the petitioners right to  administer  their College  as  the  appointment of all the  staff  has  to  be approved by the Vice-Chancellor and that subsequent  changes will  also  have to be reported to the University  for  Vice Chancellor’s  approval.   We  have  already  held  that  the Petitioners  institutions  .are established by  a  religious minority  and therefore under Article .30 this minority  has the  right  to  administer  their  educational  institutions according  to  their  choice.  Clauses 2(1) (a)  and  17  of ,Chapter V in our view certainly interferes with that right. In  the  case  of Kerala Education  Bill  (1)  dealing  with Article 30(1) this Court observed at page 1053 :               "The  key  to the understanding  of  the  true               meaning  and implication of the Article  under               consideration  are  the words  "of  their  own               choice".  It is said that the dominant word is               "choice" and the content of that Article is as               wide as the choice of the particular  minority               community  may  make  it.  The  ambit  of  the               rights   conferred   by  Article   30(1)   has               therefore to be determined on a  consideration               of  the matter from the points of view of  the               educational institutions themselves".               While so stating it was nonetheless observed               "that  the constitutional right to  administer               an  educational  institution of  their  choice               does not necessarily (1)  [1959] S.C.R. 995.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 24  

708               militate  against  the claim of the  State  to               insist  that in order to grant aid  the  State               may prescribe reasonable regulations to ensure               the  excellence  of  the  institution  to   be               aided". Similarly in Rev.  Sidhajbhai Sabhai & Ors. v. State  Bombay & Anr. (1) it was held that :               "Unlike  Article  19 the  fundamental  freedom               under clause (1) of Article 30 is absolute  in               terms  ;  it  is  not  made  subject  to   any               reasonable  restrictions  of  the  nature  the               fundamental freedoms enunciated in Article  19               may   be   subjected   to.    AR   minorities,               linguistic or religious have by Article 30 (1)               an absolute right to establish and  administer               educational institutions of their choice;  and               any law or executive direction which seeks  to               infringe  the  substance of that  right  under               Article  30(1) would to that extent  be  void.               This,  however, is not to say that it  is  not               open  to the State to impose regulations  upon               the exercise of this right......... Regulation               made  in the true interests of  efficiency  of               instruction,  discipline, health,  sanitation,               morality,  public  order  and  the  like   may               undoubtedly be imposed.  Such regulations  are               not restrictions on the substance of the right               which  is guaranteed ; they secure the  proper               functioning  of  the institution,  in  matters               educational". We  have already seen that in Rev.  Father W. Proost &  Ors. v.  the State of Bihar & Ors. (2) the provisions of  Section 48(A)  which  required to selection of the teachers  of  all affiliated  Colleges including the Colleges  established  by the  minorities,  to  be  made  by  the  University  Service Commission,  was  held to interfere with the rights  of  the petitioners in that case.  In that case, while the  petition was  pending  in the Court, Section 48(B) was added  to  the Bihar  State  University  Act  whereby  notwithstanding  the provisions  of  Section  48(A) exemption was  given  to  the minority institutions to make appointments with the approval of the Commission and the Syndicate, the petitioners claimed exemption  under  Section  48(B) and submitted  that  as  an affiliated  College  established  by  a  minority  based  on religion  or language they are exempted from  Section  48(A) and  that if this petition was accepted they  will  withdraw the petition which had become superfluous.  Even this prayer was not acceded to by the State and consequently it was held that  they  were entitled to the  exemption  claimed.   This decision  is not therefore an authority for the  proposition that  even  the  requirement that the staff  of  a  minority educational institution (1) [1963] 3 S.C.R. 837.       (2) [1969] 2 S.C.R. 73 709 be appointed, dismissed or removed only with the approval of the  University or the State does not infringe the fight  to administer the institution guaranteed under Article 30(1). In  our  view  there is no possible  justification  for  the provisions contained in clauses 2(1) (a) and 17 of Chapter V of the statutes which decidedly interfere with the rights of management  of the Petitioners Colleges.  These’  provisions cannot  therefore be made as conditions of affiliation,  the non-compliance  of  which would involve  disaffiliation  and consequently  they will have to be struck down as  offending

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 24  

Article 30(1). Clause 18 however in our view does not suffer from the  same vice as Clause 17 because that provision in so far as it  is applicable   to  the  minority  institutions  empowers   the University to prescribe by regulations governing the service and  conduct  of  teachers which is enacted  in  the  larger interests of the Institutions to ensure their efficiency and excellence.   It  may  for instance issue  an  ordinance  in respect  of  age  of  superannuation  or  prescribe  minimum qualifications   for  teachers  to  be  employed   by   such Institutions  either  generally or in  particular  subjects. Uniformity  in  the  conditions of service  and  conduct  of teachers  in  all  non-Government Colleges  would  make  for harmony and avoid frustration.  Of course while the power to make  ordinances  in respect of the matters referred  to  is unexceptional  the nature of the infringement of the  right, if  any,  under  Article 30(1) will  depend  on  the  actual purpose and import of the ordinance when made and the manner in  which it is likely to affect the administration  of  the educational institution, about which it is not possible  now to predicate. There  is then the larger question which has been  urged  at some  length namely that having regard to Section 72 of  the Reorganisation Act the State legislature is not competent to enact  Section  5  of  the  Act  which  empowers  the  State Government by Notification to compulsorily disaffiliate from the Punjab University all Colleges including the Colleges of the minorities situated in the areas which are now in Punjab and  affiliate  them to the University.  Section 72  of  the Reorganisation Act and Section 5 of the Act are as follows :               Section  72(1).-Save  as  otherwise  expressly               provided  by the foregoing provisions of  this               part,  where any body  ,corporate  constituted               under  a Central Act, State Act or  Provincial               Act  for the existing State of Punjab  or  any               part thereof serves the needs of the successor               States or has, by virtue of the provisions  of               Part 11, become an inter.State body corporate,               then  the body corporate shall, on  .and  from               the  appointed day, continue to  function  and               operate in those areas in respect of which  it               was functioning               710               and  operating  immediately before  that  day,               subject to such directions as may from time to               time be issued by the Central Government until               other  provision is made by law in respect  of               the said body corporate.               (2)Any  direction  issued  by  the  Central               Government under sub-section (1) in respect of               any   such  body  corporate  may   include   a               direction that any law by which the said  body               corporate   is   governed   shall,   in    its               application  to  that  body  corporate,   have               effect,   subject  to  such   exceptions   and               modifications  as  may  be  specified  in  the               direction.               (3)For  the removal of doubt it  is  hereby               declared  that the provisions of this  Section               shall  apply  also to  the  Punjab  University               constituted  under the Punjab University  Act,               1947,   the  Punjab  Agricultural   University               constituted  under  the  Punjab   Agricultural               University Act, 1961 and the Board constituted               under  the provisions of Part III of the  Sikh

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 24  

             Gurdwaras Act, 1925.               (4)For the purpose of giving effect to  the               provisions  of  this section in so far  as  it               relates  to  the  Punjab  University  and  the               Punjab Agricultural University referred to  in               sub-section (3) the successor State shall make               such  grants  as the Central  Government  may,               from time to time, by order, determine.               Section  5(1)-The  State  Government  may,  by               Notification specify the limits of the area in               which the University shall exercise its powers               and perform its duties.               (2)Notwithstanding  anything  contained  in               any other law for the time being in force,  no               educational  institution beyond the limits  of               the area specified under subsection (1)  shall               be   associated  with  or  admitted   to   any               privileges of the University.               (3)Notwithstanding  anything  contained  in               any other law for the time being in force, any               educational  institution situated  within  the               limits of the area specified under sub-section               (1)  shall, with effect from such date as  may               be  notified  in  this  behalf  by  the  State               Government be deemed to be associated with and               admitted  to the privileges of the  University               and  shall cease to be associated in  any  way               with, or be admitted to any privileges of  the               Punjab University; and different dates may  be               appointed for different institutions. The provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 72  of the  Reorganisation  Act are similar to those  contained  in Section 109 711 of  the  States  Reorganisation Act  1956  except  that  for removal   of  doubts  sub-section  (3)  has  specified   the institutions named therein as being governed by sub-sections (1)  and (2).  Sub-section (4) is consequential on  the  two Universities   being made subject to the said provisions  by requiring the successor state to make such grants to them as the  Central  Government  may from time  to  time  by  order determine. The  State Government had by Notification of the 16th  March under sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Act specified  the districts  as  the  areas in which  the  Universities  shall exercise  its powers and perform its duties and  under  sub- section  (3) of the said Section, it further  notified  30th June   1970   as  the  date  from  which   the   educational institutions  situated  within the limits of  the  areas  so specified  in  the  notification  shall  be  deemed  to   be associated  with  and  admitted to  the  privileges  of  the Universities. The  contention  of  the Petitioners  is  that  since  under Section  72  of  the Reorganisation Act it  is  the  Central Government   which  is  vested  with  the  power  to   issue directions in respect of the Punjab University or the Punjab Agricultural  University  and/or  to  amend  and  alter  the provisions  of  the  Punjab University  Act  or  the  Punjab Agricultural  University Act, the State Legislature  is  not competent to legislate in respect of the said University  or Universities without the necessary directions of the Central Government.   This is sought to be justified on  the  ground (a) that in respect of the Punjabi University the  extension of  jurisdiction of the University by a  notification  under the relevant provisions of the Punjabi University Act issued

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 24  

by the State Government, the Central Government had issued a direction  disaffiliating  the Colleges  situated  in  those areas  which were affiliated to the Punjab  University,  (b) that  as  the Reorganisation of the State of  Punjab  itself involved various matters upon which the successor States may not be agreed Parliament by law had in exercise of the power vested  in  it, enacted provisions  empowering  the  Central Government to give, directions in the interests of both  the States,  which directions had the affect of making a  change in the then existing law governing the Corporate bodies till such time as both the States agreed.  Though it is submitted that  this power is transitory nonetheless it  is  effective till  such time as the Central Government in agreement  with the States concerned permits them to legislate in respect of the  body corporate by giving necessary directions  in  that behalf. On the other hand it is contended by the Respondents  inter- alia  (1)  that  under item 11 of List  II  of  the  Seventh Schedule to the Constitution education being a State subject the State Legislature alone and not Parliament, is competent to  legislate  in  respect of  Universities,  support  being gathered for this submission from 712 the  provisions of Sections 88 and 89 of the  Reorganisation Act  under  Which the law in force  immediately  before  the appointed  day could be otherwise provided for, or  altered, repealed or amended only "by a competent legislature"  which in  the  context is that legislature which is  competent  to legislate  under any of the entries in List I, II  or  under the  concurrent List III of the Seventh Schedule;  (2)  that the  law referred to in subsection (1) of Section 72 of  the States Reorganisation Act which could take away the power of the Central Government to give directions from time to  time as  may  be  necessary in respect of  the  ’functioning  and operating’ of corporations including those in respect of the two Universities referred to in sub-section (3) is the State law,  as it could not have been the intention of  Parliament to  deprive the States of their legislative powers by  means of  a  law  made  under Article 4  to  give  effect  to  the Reorganisation of the States by having recourse to the power to  make  supplemental, incidental  and  consequential  pro- visions ; (3) that Parliament itself understood that it  has no  power  to  legislate  in  respect  of  one  of  the  two Universities namely the Punjab Agricultural University  when it  enacted the Haryana and Punjab  Agricultural  University Act   16  of  1970,  pursuant  to  the  resolution  of   the legislature of the State of Punjab and Haryana under  clause (1)  of  Article  252 of the Constitution in  which  it  was categorically stated, as is apparent from the resolution  of the  legislature  of  Haryana produced before  us,  that  as legislation had to be undertaken under entries 11 and 32  of list  11 in the Seventh Schedule and as "Parliament  has  no power  to make a law for the State except as provided  under Article 249 and 250 thereof" it "shall by law make provision for  the  dissolution of the aforesaid  Punjab  Agricultural University....  for  setting  up  a  separate   Agricultural University............   for   vesting   the   rights    and liabilities of the University so dissolved in the University to be so set up and for  all matters connected therewith  or incidental thereto", and (4)  that in any case in a petition under Article 32 this Court cannot go  into the question  of legislative competence if the law that is impugned does  not in any way affect the fundamental rights of the petitioners. We have already found that none of the provisions of the Act offend any fundamental rights of the Petitioners.  But it is

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 24  

contended  on behalf of the Petitioners that in  a  petition under  Article 32 once it is alleged and a prima facie  case is  made  out that the fundamental rights of a  citizen  are threatened  or  violated  this Court is not  only  bound  to entertain  it for determining to what extent the  allegation is  valid  but  is also bound to go into  the  question,  if raised,  that  the law under which it is  alleged  that  his fundamental  right is infringed is invalid on the ground  of want  of  legislative competence.  There are two  facets  to this submission. 713 Firstly whether ultimately any fundamental right in fact  is threatened  or  violated, so long as a prima facie  case  of such  a  threat or violation is made out  a  petition  under Article  32  must  be  entertained.  Secondly  once  it   is entertained  irrespective of whether it is found  ultimately that  in fact no fundamental rights of the  petitioners  are invaded  the vires of the legislation or the  competence  of the  legislature to enact the impugned legislation  must  be gone  into and determined.  While the first  proposition  is valid, the second is not. Shri  Tarkunde the learned Advocate for the  Respondents  in Writ  Petitions  Nos. 353 and 354 of 1970 which  were  heard immediately  after these petitions has raised  a  contention similar  to that raised in the second submission in  support of  which he referred to the case of Mohammad Yasin  v.  The Town Area Committee, Jalalabad & Anr., (1).  We do not think that this decision supports .his contention because in  that case  it  was  held  that in the absence  of  an  valid  law authorising  the Town Committee to levy any  fees  otherwise than  for  the use of any immovable property  vested  in  or entrusted  to  the  Management of the  Town  Committee  such illegal  imposition must undoubtedly operate as  an  illegal restraint  ,and  must infringe the unfettered right  of  the wholesale  dealer  to  carry on  his  occupation,  trade  or business which is guaranteed to him by Article 19(1) (g)  of the  Constitution.  In that case the levy on the  petitioner as  a wholesale dealer was held to be obviously ultra  vires the powers of the Committee and therefore the bye-law  under which such a fee was levied could not be said to  constitute a  valid  law  which alone may under Article  19(6)  of  the Constitution impose a restriction on the right conferred  by Article 19(1) (g).  It is, therefore, clear that as long  as the  petitioner  makes  out  a prima  facie  case  that  his fundamental  rights are affected or threatened he cannot  be prevented from challenging that the law complained of  which affects  or invades these rights is invalid because of  want of legislative competence.  In Chiranjilal Chowdhuri v.  The Union  of  India & Ors. (2), Mukherjea, J., as he  then  was gave expression to a similar view as to the  maintainability of a petition under ,Article 32.  At page 899 he said :               "To make out a case under this Article, it  is               incumbent upon the petitioner to establish not               merely  that the law complained of  is  beyond               the  competence of the particular  legislature               as  not being covered by any of the  items  in               the legislative lists, but that it affects  or               invades  his fundamental rights guaranteed  by               the  Constitution,  of  which  he  could  seek               enforcement by an appropriate writ or               order". (1)  [1952] S.C.R. 572. (2) [1950] S.C.R. 869. 714 It is apparent therefore that the validity or the invalidity

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 23 of 24  

of the impugned law. on the ground of legislative competence should  purport  to infringe the fundamental rights  of  the petitioner   as   a  necessary  condition   of   its   being adjudicated.   But if in fact the law does not, even on  the assumption  that  it  is  valid,  infringe  any  fundamental rights,  this  Court  will not decide  that  question  in  a petition  under Article 32.  The reason for it  is  obvious, namely that no petition under Article 32 will be entertained if  fundamental rights are not affected and if the  impugned law  does  not  affect the fundamental rights  it  would  be contrary to this principle to determine whether that law  in fact has legislative competence or not. Gajendragadkar J., as he then was in Khyarbari Tea Co. Ltd., & Anr. v. State of Assam (1), while dealing with a challenge to,  the  validity of Section 24 of the  Assam  Taxation  on Goods Act 1961 said at page 1009 :               "There  may be some force in this  contention,               but  we do not see how the petitioners can  be               permitted to challenge the validity of Section               24  when  it is not alleged by them  that  any               action  is proposed to be taken  against  them               under  the said Section.  In dealing with  the               petition  under  Article 32 this  Court  would               naturally  confine  the  petitioners  to   the               provisions of the impugned Act by which  their               fundamental  rights  are  either  affected  or               threatened.  That is why we are not  satisfied               that  it is necessary to. decide the  question               about  the  validity  of  Section  24  in  the               present proceedings". In Saghir Ahmad v. State of U. P. (2) it was held that  when the  enactment  on the face of it is found  to  violate  the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution it must be held to be invalid unless those  who support  the legislation can bring it within the purview  of the  exception laid down in clause 6 of the Article  but  if the Respondents did not place any materials before the Court to   establish  that  the  legislation  comes   within   the permissible  limits  of clause 6, it is surely not  for  the Appellants to prove negatively that the legislation was  not reasonable  and  was  not conducive to the  welfare  of  the community.  There are other such instances where this  Court has drawn an initial presumption of constitutionality when a statute was impugned as being unconstitutional. This  being the legal position in our view when once an  im- punged  law  does not affect the fundamental rights  of  the petitioners (1) [1964] 5 S.C.R. 975. (2) [1955] S.C.R. 707 & 726. 715 as  in  this  case we have founded it to be so,  it  is  not necessary to go into the question of legislative  competence or to decide on the validity of Section 5. We  have  therefore  no  hesitation  in  holding  that   the notification  under which the Colleges have been  affiliated to  the  Universities  is legally valid and  from  the  date specified   therein   Petitioners  Colleges  cease   to   be affiliated  to the Punjab University.  In the  result  these petitions are allowed to the extent that clause 2(1) (a) and Clause  17 of Chapter V of the statutes are struck  down  as affecting the fundamental rights of the petitioners, but  in the circumstances without costs. K. B. N.                      Petition partly allowed. 716

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 24 of 24