Jilani calls meet to discuss issue

ZAFARYAB JILANI, an Aligarh Muslim University alumni and lawyer, has called a meeting of AMU Students? Union leaders and the staff here tomorrow to discuss the fall-out of the Allahabad High Court order stripping the university of its minority status and chalk out a strategy to protect its character.

ZAFARYAB JILANI, an Aligarh Muslim University alumni and lawyer, has called a meeting of AMU Students’ Union leaders and the staff here tomorrow to discuss the fall-out of the Allahabad High Court order stripping the university of its minority status and chalk out a strategy to protect its character.

HT Image

“The HC order is shocking to us and we will fight it both legally and politically,” Jilani told the Hindustan Times. He said on the legal front, the university administration as well as the Central Government would be urged to challenge the verdict in the Supreme Court. And on political front, political parties would be asked to raise the issue in Parliament and bring a Bill to do away with any lacunae, if any, coming in the way of AMU’s minority status.

AMU Students’ Union president Feroz Gandhi, who will be participating in the meeting tomorrow, told over pho ne from Aligarh that the students would fight at all levels to ensure that the university retained its minority status.

Terming the ruling as “shocking”, he regretted that the court had refused to look into the very spirit of the sections 2 (L) and 5 (2) (A) of the AMU Act, 1981, which says that the varsity was a minority institution established by a Muslim.

He also demanded amendment to Article 30 of the Constitution providing for minority character of AMU.

Gandhi saw the high court judgment as a rift between the legislature and the judiciary. “It is another example of a conflict between the legislature and the judiciary, where the court challenged Parliament’s powers to confer minority status on AMU,” he said, adding “We hope Parliament will assert its powers and bring and enact a law paving way for the minority status of the university.”

The AMU administration too termed the HC order as an example of a conflict between the legislature and the judiciary. University public relation officer Rahat Abrar said, “The administration has, however, expressed surprise that the high court has come to the conclusion that Parliament, which represents the sovereign will of people of India, was incompetent to effect the amendments to the AMU Act, 1981. By holding that Parliament had no jurisdiction to make such changes in 1981, the court has once more brought to the fore the conflict between Parliament and the judiciary.”

“The varsity feels that such a race for ascendancy between Parliament and the judiciary is not good for the country and expressed the hope that the legislature will be able to defend its powers as supreme the law-maker of the country, he said.

The university was awaiting a copy of the judgment to decide the future course of action, he added.