We will start in the year 2002 when the 11-judge Supreme court bench delivered its verdict in the TMA Pai Foundation case.
The most important part of the judgement was this
“Private education institutes established by minorities and non-minorities were held to be on equal footing. Hindus could enjoy the exact same rights under Art 19–1(g) that the minorities did under Art 29/30.”
Article 29 states
Today will do a thread on the 93rd amendment and how it made Hindus second class citizens in their own country
We will start in the year 2002 when the 11-judge Supreme court bench delivered its verdict in the TMA Pai Foundation case.
The most important part of the judgement was this
“Private education institutes established by minorities and non-minorities were held to be on equal footing. Hindus could enjoy the exact same rights under Art 19–1(g) that the minorities did under Art 29/30.”
Article 29 states
Today will do a thread on the 93rd amendment and how it made Hindus second class citizens in their own country
We will start in the year 2002 when the 11-judge Supreme court bench delivered its verdict in the TMA Pai Foundation case.
The most important part of the judgement was this
“Private education institutes established by minorities and non-minorities were held to be on equal footing. Hindus could enjoy the exact same rights under Art 19–1(g) that the minorities did under Art 29/30.”
Article 29 states
Today will do a thread on the 93rd amendment and how it made Hindus second class citizens in their own country
We will start in the year 2002 when the 11-judge Supreme court bench delivered its verdict in the TMA Pai Foundation case.
The most important part of the judgement was this
“Private education institutes established by minorities and non-minorities were held to be on equal footing. Hindus could enjoy the exact same rights under Art 19–1(g) that the minorities did under Art 29/30.”
Article 29 states
Article 30 states
Article 19–1(g) states All citizens shall have the right — to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
That this kind of parity was and continues to be anathema to some people can be inferred from below excerpt from the speech
Fali Nariman gave at the National Minorities Convention on the 14th of September 2014
“The decision in TMA Pai was a un-mitigated disaster for the minorities. Let me tell you why. Article 30 has now been placed by Court decision on a much lower pedestal than it was — or was intended to be.
It has been equated only with a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g)– i.e. a mere right to an occupation (running an educational institution the Judges said is an “occupation” like any other)”
Full text can be found here .
sacw.net/article9565.ht…
3 years and 3 judgements later in August 2005 the principle of parity to Hindus in education had emerged unscathed from three big constitution benches .
That is when the Congress led UPA govt just decided to, simply change the Constitution of India.
They quickly added a new section in the Constitution of India called Article 15(5) which read.
The idea was to remove the parity by explicitly encoding the exemption for institutions run by minorities in the constitution itself
This idea was implemented by Arjun Singh — the then Congress HRD Minister.
Since a large chunk of the top educational institutions are run in India by minorities — the bill predictably hurt the Dalits by shutting them off elite professional colleges. For example in Kerala minorities run 14 of 18 medical colleges
As we can see Just like Art 370 this amendment also caused untold hardships to the Dalits as till today Dalits don’t have quotas in aided or unaided minority institutions.
The BJP opposition to such a divisive legislation was not very sustained or principled.
In the end, on Dec 22 2005 the 93rd Amendment was passed with the BJP voting for the bill .
The above information has been sourced from the writings of @realitycheckind .
• • •