Judgement

KRISHNA IYER, J.: (for himself and on behalf of A. C. Gupta, J.) (Majority view):- Our essay in this appeal is to interpret and apply Art. 30 of the Constitution, illumined by the ratio of the recent leading case on the constitutional rights of minorities vis a vis educational institutions where a Bench of 11 Judges handed down six opinions on the thorny issue. As we proceed to judgment, we are reminded of two famous American observations. Chief Justice Marshall, while deciding the celebrated Mc. Culloch v: Maryland case, (1816 - 19) 4 Wheat 316 at p. 407, made the pregnant remark: We must never forget that it is the constitution we are expounding . Governor Hughes, soon to ascend the U. S. SC, said: We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the Judges say it is . Reverentially guided and bound by great precedents but mindful of the luminous texts and goals of the Constitution itself, we have to attempt the task.

2. The facts of the present case are virtually admitted, the precedent that binds us is of fresh vintage but the legal test when applied to this concrete case-situation is fine, if not baffling. Of course, the only area for judicial exploration is