Supreme Court · 2025

“7. As far as the validity of the declaration of minority status is concerned, this Court in N. Ammad v. Emjay High School [N. Ammad v. Emjay High School, (1998) 6 SCC 674 : 1 SCEC 732] has held that the certificate of the declaration of minority status is only a declaration of an existing status. Therefore, there is no question of availability of the status only from the date of declaration. What is declared is a status which was already in existence. … * * *

10. Chapter IV deals with functions and powers of the Commission. Under Section 11(f), the Commission has been vested with the power rather the mandate to decide all questions relating to the status of any institution as a minority educational institution and declare its status as such. Section 11 of the Act is quoted hereunder: [Page No. 4 ] ‘11. Functions of Commission.—Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Commission shall— (a) advise the Central Government or any State Government on any question relating to the education of minorities that may be referred to it; (b) enquire, suo motu, or on a petition presented to it by any minority educational institution, or any person on its behalf into complaints regarding deprivation or violation of rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice and any dispute relating to affiliation to a University and report its finding to the appropriate Government for its implementation; (c) intervene in any proceeding involving any deprivation or violation of the educational rights of the minorities before a court with the leave of such court; (d) review the safeguards provided by or under the Constitution, or any law for the time being in force, for the protection of educational rights of the minorities and recommend measures for their effective implementation; (e) specify measures to promote and preserve the minority status and character of institutions of their choice established by minorities; (f) decide all questions relating to the status of any institution as a minority educational institution and declare its status as such; (g) make recommendations to the appropriate Government for the effective implementation of programmes and schemes relating to the Minority Educational Institutions; and (h) do such other acts and things as may be necessary, incidental or conducive to the attainment of all or any of the objects of the Commission.’

11. Therefore, after the introduction of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004, it is also within the jurisdiction and mandate of the National Commission to issue the certificate regarding the status of a minority educational institution. Once the Commission thus issues a certificate, it is a declaration of an existing status.” (emphasis in original)

8. Reliance is also placed upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sisters of ST. Joseph of Cluny vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.; (2018) 6 SCC 772, wherein Section 11 of the NCMEI Act, 2004 was interpreted as under: "23. Secondly, Section 11(f) is a very wide provision which empowers Ncmei to decide all questions relating to the status of an institution as a minority educational institution and to declare its status as such. The expression “all questions” as well as the expression “relating to”, which are words of wide import, clothe Ncmei with the power to decide any [Page No. 5 ] question that may arise, which may relate directly or indirectly, with respect to the status of an institution as a minority education institution. Looked at by itself, Section 11(f) would include the declaration of the status of an institution as a minority educational institution at all stages. Article 30 of the Constitution of India grants a fundamental right to all minorities, whether based on religion or language, to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. The power under Section 11(f), read by itself, would clothe Ncmei with the power to decide any question that may arise with regard to the right to establish and/or administer educational institutions by a minority. The power does not stop there. It also includes the power to declare such institution as a minority educational institution, which is established and administered as such, so that it can avail of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution.

28. This judgment unequivocally holds that, insofar as existing minority institutions are concerned, Section 11(f) clearly confers jurisdiction on Ncmei to issue a certificate regarding the status of the minority educational institution. We respectfully concur with the aforesaid view."

9. In the light of the said, it is argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

10. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 tries to justify the order by saying that the prescriptions contained in the Government Order also ought to have been considered, however, he does not dispute the broad proposition of the law as explained by the Supreme Court in the two judgments referred above.

11. In the light of the prescriptions contained in the NCMEI Act, 2004 and in particular Section 11 thereof, it is clear that the power to declare an institution as a minority institution vests exclusively in the domain of the power conferred upon the commission. Once the Act has been enacted, the Government Order loses relevance. This position of law was explained by the Supreme Court in the cases as extracted above.

12. In view of the said, the necessary conclusion is that the order impugned dated 10.08.2025 cannot be sustained wherein he places reliance on the Government Order of 1999. Thus, the same cannot be sustained and is quashed. Consequential orders dated 10.08.2025 contained in Annexure - 2 and Annexure - 3 are also quashed. [Page No. 6 ]

13. As the first round of conselling is to conclude tomorrow (13.08.2025), the respondent no.4/DGME/competent authority is directed to pass a fresh order in respect of the application filed by the petitioner by 3 PM tomorrow i.e. 13.08.2025 and communicate the same to the petitioner on their Email by 3 PM itself.

14. The petitioner shall provide their Email on which the communication shall be sent to the respondent no.4 alongwith a copy of this order.

15. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 shall communicate this order for compliance.

16. Present petition stands allowed in above terms.

17. Copy of the order be provided to counsel for the parties today itself on payment of usual charges. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 VNP/- [Pankaj Bhatia, J.] VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

“7. As far as the validity of the declaration of minority status is concerned, this Court in N. Ammad v. Emjay High School [N. Ammad v. Emjay High School, (1998) 6 SCC 674 : 1 SCEC 732] has held that the certificate of the declaration of minority status is only a declaration of an existing status. Therefore, there is no question of availability of the status only from the date of declaration. What is declared is a status which was already in existence. … * * *

10. Chapter IV deals with functions and powers of the Commission. Under Section 11(f), the Commission has been vested with the power rather the mandate to decide all questions relating to the status of any institution as a minority educational institution and declare its status as such. Section 11 of the Act is quoted hereunder: [Page No. 4 ] ‘11. Functions of Commission.—Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Commission shall— (a) advise the Central Government or any State Government on any question relating to the education of minorities that may be referred to it; (b) enquire, suo motu, or on a petition presented to it by any minority educational institution, or any person on its behalf into complaints regarding deprivation or violation of rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice and any dispute relating to affiliation to a University and report its finding to the appropriate Government for its implementation; (c) intervene in any proceeding involving any deprivation or violation of the educational rights of the minorities before a court with the leave of such court; (d) review the safeguards provided by or under the Constitution, or any law for the time being in force, for the protection of educational rights of the minorities and recommend measures for their effective implementation; (e) specify measures to promote and preserve the minority status and character of institutions of their choice established by minorities; (f) decide all questions relating to the status of any institution as a minority educational institution and declare its status as such; (g) make recommendations to the appropriate Government for the effective implementation of programmes and schemes relating to the Minority Educational Institutions; and (h) do such other acts and things as may be necessary, incidental or conducive to the attainment of all or any of the objects of the Commission.’

11. Therefore, after the introduction of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act, 2004, it is also within the jurisdiction and mandate of the National Commission to issue the certificate regarding the status of a minority educational institution. Once the Commission thus issues a certificate, it is a declaration of an existing status.” (emphasis in original)

8. Reliance is also placed upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sisters of ST. Joseph of Cluny vs. State of West Bengal and Ors.; (2018) 6 SCC 772, wherein Section 11 of the NCMEI Act, 2004 was interpreted as under: "23. Secondly, Section 11(f) is a very wide provision which empowers Ncmei to decide all questions relating to the status of an institution as a minority educational institution and to declare its status as such. The expression “all questions” as well as the expression “relating to”, which are words of wide import, clothe Ncmei with the power to decide any [Page No. 5 ] question that may arise, which may relate directly or indirectly, with respect to the status of an institution as a minority education institution. Looked at by itself, Section 11(f) would include the declaration of the status of an institution as a minority educational institution at all stages. Article 30 of the Constitution of India grants a fundamental right to all minorities, whether based on religion or language, to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. The power under Section 11(f), read by itself, would clothe Ncmei with the power to decide any question that may arise with regard to the right to establish and/or administer educational institutions by a minority. The power does not stop there. It also includes the power to declare such institution as a minority educational institution, which is established and administered as such, so that it can avail of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 30 of the Constitution.

28. This judgment unequivocally holds that, insofar as existing minority institutions are concerned, Section 11(f) clearly confers jurisdiction on Ncmei to issue a certificate regarding the status of the minority educational institution. We respectfully concur with the aforesaid view."

9. In the light of the said, it is argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

10. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 tries to justify the order by saying that the prescriptions contained in the Government Order also ought to have been considered, however, he does not dispute the broad proposition of the law as explained by the Supreme Court in the two judgments referred above.

11. In the light of the prescriptions contained in the NCMEI Act, 2004 and in particular Section 11 thereof, it is clear that the power to declare an institution as a minority institution vests exclusively in the domain of the power conferred upon the commission. Once the Act has been enacted, the Government Order loses relevance. This position of law was explained by the Supreme Court in the cases as extracted above.

12. In view of the said, the necessary conclusion is that the order impugned dated 10.08.2025 cannot be sustained wherein he places reliance on the Government Order of 1999. Thus, the same cannot be sustained and is quashed. Consequential orders dated 10.08.2025 contained in Annexure - 2 and Annexure - 3 are also quashed. [Page No. 6 ]

13. As the first round of conselling is to conclude tomorrow (13.08.2025), the respondent no.4/DGME/competent authority is directed to pass a fresh order in respect of the application filed by the petitioner by 3 PM tomorrow i.e. 13.08.2025 and communicate the same to the petitioner on their Email by 3 PM itself.

14. The petitioner shall provide their Email on which the communication shall be sent to the respondent no.4 alongwith a copy of this order.

15. Learned counsel for respondent no.4 shall communicate this order for compliance.

16. Present petition stands allowed in above terms.

17. Copy of the order be provided to counsel for the parties today itself on payment of usual charges. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 VNP/- [Pankaj Bhatia, J.] VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench