Case Comment On Aligarh Muslim University V. Naresh Agarwal & Ors. (2024 SCC Online Sc 3213)
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 9, 2025
- 2 min read
Updated: Nov 10, 2025
Mysoon Saifudeen, LL.M, School of Legal Studies, CUSAT
Adarsh M.V., Research Scholar, School of Legal Studies, CUSAT
Aligarh Muslim University v Naresh Agarwal & Ors (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3213)
BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 2286 of 2006
Date of Decision: 08/11/2024
Bench: D.Y.Chandrachud CJI, Sanjiv Khanna J, Surya Kant J, J.B.Pardiwala J, Dipankar
Datta J, Manoj Misra J, S.C.Sharma J
1. Facts of the Case:
In 1877, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, a 19th-century Muslim reformer, founded the Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College (MAO College) at Aligarh. It was established with the intention to impart modern British education while carefully balancing and protecting Islamic values and principles. On 14th November 1920, the Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920 was passed to incorporate the MAO College and the Muslim University Association into one single university. The Act transferred all the properties vesting in the MAO College and the Muslim University Association to the AMU. In 1951, the AMU (Amendment) Act, 1951 was passed.
The amendment abolished the University's compulsory religious education for Muslim students. The amendment also removed the provision which mandated only Muslim representation in the Court of the university, which was the governing body of the university. A further amendment in 1965, removed the court as the supreme governing body of the university. These amendments were challenged in the case of S Azeez Basha and anr. v UOI (1967). The petitioners challenged the amendment on the ground that the amendment violated their right to establish and administer educational institutions under (Article 30 (1)) of the Constitution of India. Further, they contended that the amendments violated the institution’s right to carry out religious and charitable causes (Article 26(a)), the freedom of religion (Article 25), the right to conserve culture and language (Article 29), and the right to acquire property (Article 31) and articles 14 and 19 of the constitution. The SC however dismissed the petition on the ground that the university was established through the AMU Act, 1920 and significant power of administration was not exclusively with Muslims.
