Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. -
(1.)On October 31, 2002, while recording my answers to the eleven questions referred to the Bench of eleven learned Judges of this Court, I noted in a separate judgment, concurring with the majority except in regard to answers to question Nos. 5(b), 8, 10 and 11, that I would give my reasons later for agreeing on those aspects with the opinion of our learned sister Ruma Pal, J. and dissenting with the majority opinion as well as the opinion of learned brother Variava, J., with whom leaned brother Bhan, J. agreed. Here follow the reasons.
(2.)The difference of opinion mainly relates to the true interpretation of Clause (2) of Article 29 and Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 30 of the Constitution and their interaction.
(3.)Article 30 is a much discussed provision in Courts. It has been the subject matter of consideration by various High Courts as well as by this Court. I have already quoted Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 30 and Clause (1) of Article 29 in the said judgment. To appreciate various rival contentions, first I shall examine the extent of the right conferred by Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 30. It is a common ground that all minorities, whether based on religious or language, are bestowed the right to establish and to administer educational institutions of their choice in Clause (1) of Article 30. The following aspects of the right conferred therein on the minorities need to be noticed: (1) to establish educational institutions; (2) which are of their choice and (3) to administer them.