Case Title: CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE ASSOCIATION V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
The Supreme Court of India reiterated the principles regulating minority educational institutions under Article 30 of the Indian Constitution in its ruling supporting the legality of the National Eligibility and Common Entrance Examination for admission to medical and dentistry programmes.
A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, Vineet Saran, and M.R. Shah remarked that the freedom granted to religious and linguistic minorities to manage educational institutions of their choosing is not an "absolute right" in the present case. Regulation of this right is not unaffected.
According to the verdict, which cited an 11-judge bench decision in T.M.A. Pai Foundation, (2002) the right to create and manage broadly includes the following rights:
to admit students;
to set up a reasonable fee structure;
to constitute a governing body;
to appoint staff (teaching and non-teaching); and
to take action if there is a dereliction of duty on the part of any employees
Emphasising the judgment of In Re The Kerala Education Bill, 1957, the court observed that in order to guarantee the institution's quality, the State may impose rules. Undoubtedly, regulations created in the genuine interests of discipline, health, cleanliness, morality, public order, and the like may be enforced. These rules ensure the institution's smooth operation in the area of education without restricting the content of the right, which is protected.
According to the ruling in St. Stephen's College vs. the University of Delhi, (1992), the State has the authority to create regulatory laws as long as minorities' fundamental right to run educational institutions is preserved. However, regulations must not have the impact of denying minorities the ability to educate their children at their own institutions.
"In the field of administration, it is not reasonable to claim that minority institutions will have complete autonomy. Checks on the administration may be necessary in order to ensure that the administration is efficient and sound and will serve the academic needs of the institution", the judgment quoted from the precedent Ahmedabad St. Xavier's College Society and Anr. v. State of Gujarat and Anr., (1974).
It was also noted in St. Xavier's case that regulation must pass two tests:
the reasonableness test,
that it controls the institution's educational nature and promotes development of the institution as an effective educational tool.
Additionally, it was stressed in the case that minority institutions cannot be permitted to deviate from the high standards of excellence required of educational institutions or refuse to follow the norm under the pretext of exclusive management rights. The ability to mismanage cannot be a part of the right to administer. Furthermore, it was decided that minority schools have the freedom to admit students of their choosing, with the understanding that appropriate restrictions on academic eligibility and regulations that would serve students' interests may be applied to ensure efficiency and justice.
In P.A. Inamdar and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (2005), the court noted that Article 30 of the Constitution did not prevent the State from intervening to ensure transparency and recognition of merit in the matter of admissions and that the conditions of recognition are binding on such institutions.
Using these precedents as a guide, the bench found that Article 30's protections for linguistic or religious minorities do not contradict other provisions of the Constitution. The constitutional intent is to balance the rights in the national and greater public interest. The Court also noted that NEET was a "regulatory instrument meant for the proper running of institutions and to guarantee that the level of education is maintained" in its analysis of the issue.
The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the provisions set forth in Section 10D of the MCI Act and the Dentists Act and Regulations created by MCI/DCI do not contradict the rights provided under Article 30.