ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE ETC. ETC. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1991] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 121 · Decided: 06-12-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.H. KANIA
cites 16 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE ETC. ETC. 
A 
V. 
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI ETC. ETC. 
DECEMBER 6, 1991 
[M. H. KANIA, K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY , N.M. KASLIW AL, 
B 
M. FATHIMA BEEVI AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 30( 1 }-Minority educational insti-
tution-Constitutional safe-guards-Object and purpose of. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 30( 1 ), 29( I), 29(2 }-Minority edu- • C 
cational institution-Religious autonomy in education and constitutional guar-
antee-Construction-Rights under the Articles-Distinction. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 30(1), 29, 14, 15-Minorityeduca-
. tional institution-Admission on the basis of religion-Legality of. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 30(1}-Minority educational insti-
tution claiming protection under~equirements. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 30, 29-St. Stephen's College, 
whether a religious minority institution. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 30( I)-" Management of the affairs 
of the institution", 
11 establish", 
11 administer" -Construction-Minority educa-
tional institution-Right to administer-Nature and scope of-Delhi Univer-
sity Act, Statutes, Regulations/State control-Effect and legality of 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 30(1}-Minority educational insti-
tution-Right to administer-Admission programme of a college-Selection of 
students-Vniversity regulations/directions-Application/effect of 
D 
E 
F 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 30(1}-Minority educational insti-
tution-Admission-Selection-Interview-Purpose of--J'rocedure adopted, G 
whether reasonable. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 30(1), 30(2), 337-Minority edu-
cational institution-State aid-Object and ambit of-State control in admis-
sion matter-Effect of. 
121 
H 
122 
. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1991) SUPP. 3 S. C.R. 
A 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 14, 15, 30, 29-Minority educa-
B 
tional institution-Admission--Reservation to socially and educationally back-
ward classes and equality concep1-eonstruction. 
Interpretation of Statutes-Kinds of construction-Constitution of India, 
1950-Articles 30(1) and 29(2}-Method of Construction. 
WP N0.186811980 
The petitioner- college was a constituent college or the respondent-
Delhi University. It also was affiliated to the University. The College, 
belonging to a religious minority community, was an aided educational 
C institution. 
D 
E 
F 
The college offered three-years Degree Course in B.AJB.Sc.(Hons.), 
B.A.(Pass) and B.Sc.( General) and two years Post-graduate degree course 
in M.A. and M.Sc. 
The college had its own admission programme. The Christian stu-
dents were given preference in admission. 
On 25.5.1980, the college published "Admissions Prospectus" for the 
academic year 1.980-81. It was stated therein that ror admission for the 
first year course, the last date of receipt of applications would be 20.6.1980 
and that there would be an interview prior to final selection or students. 
On 5.6.1980, the University issued a circular to all affiliated colleges, 
notifying the last date for receipt of applications at the colleges as 
30.6.1980 and programme of admission was also phased therein. 
On 9.6.1980, the University in another circular provided certain 
guidelines for admission, that admission to B.A.(Pass)IB.A. Vocational 
(Studies) courses should be based on merit or the percentage of marks 
secured by students in the qualifying examination; that the admission to 
B.Com.(Pass), B.A.(Hons.) and B.Com(Hons.) courses should also be on 
G the basis or marks; that if a college proposed to give weightage to marks 
obtained in one or more individual subjects in addition to aggregate marks 
of the qualifying examination, it should b~ notified in advance through the 
College Prospectus or Notice Board. 
The Delhi University Students Union complained to the University 
H 
ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE v. UNNERSITY OF DELHI 
123 
that the petitioner-college was violating the University Statutes and Ordi· 
A 
nances, as it had fixed its own time schedules for receipt of applications for 
admission and conducting interview before admission-. 
The University requested the petitioner-college to conform to the 
University schedule as per its circular dated 5.6.1980. 
The Petitioner-college informed the University that no changes in its 
admission programme could be made. 
B 
When the University by its letter dated 7/9.6.1980, asked the peti· 
tioner-college to conform to the dates prescribed for the dates of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.