Art 30 of Constitution mentions only two types of minorities - Religious & Linguistic. But TMA Pai judgement interprets that since constitution does not define Minority hence it may be interpreted to indicate Political minority as well. To quote from the judgement -
“The word ‘minority’ is not defined in the Constitution but literally it means ‘a non-dominant’ group. It is a relative term and is referred to, to represent the smaller of two numbers, sections or groups called ‘majority’. In that sense, there may be political minority, religious minority, linguistic minority etc.”
In light of above, what should be final interpretation, say a ques ansked with option including - Political, Religious, Linguistic. ?
Comments
Stick to it, my advice.
Another doubt, wrt the same Pai judgement-
The Court in this case, has also made it clear that the State will be the unit in relation to which the status of religious minority is to be determined. Therefore, in declaring a community as minority based on religion under Article 30(1) the decision will have to be taken by the respective States.
If State is the authority which determines minority then how come NCM recommend minorities list to Union and Union passing orders to notify minorities ?
Eg. Sikhs are a national minority but not a minority in Punjab. Similarly, Jains- national minority, not a minority in Maharashtra.
Both the Union and the states can declare minorities.
The judgement may have been in a particular context, not sure about it.
What I understand is National Minority tag implicitly overrides State Minority ( except for those cases where advantage or privilege of concerned state, here Jain have no privilege from maharashtra govt)
Correct me if wrong.
Your interpretation is correct.
further add pro csat aspirants.