The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of minority rights under Article 30(1) of the Constitution, emphasizing the autonomy of minority educational institutions in making appointments and the preservation of their language, script, and culture.

( 1 ) INDIA is a unity in diversity ; not only in her sharp topographical features, not only in her varied climates, its flora and fauna, but more so in its peoples of diverse religions, faiths and culture. Peoples of different races of different colour speaking different languages belonging to different levels of socio-economic development inhabit in different regions of this vast country, its hills, its coasts. The unit of socio-economic life the Indian village is home to a motley mixture of castes and sub-castes of Hindu society and people of other communities too. Hindus, muslims, Christian, Jains and Parsis have lived a life of peaceful co-existence through the ages. A delicate balance between the majority and the minority community maintains. The British, it is said, pursued the policy of divide and rule. Communal clashes marked the closing years of british rule causing a sharp cleavage in the society.

( 2 ) THE issues of striking a balance between minority and majority rights is, therefore, a fundamental issue and if improperly handled may threaten the very existence of our democracy. While there may be difference of opinion as to the cause of communal clashes and whether they are fanned by people of vested interest to divide communities to vote on communal lines--a question which is not within the province of this Court to express any opinion upon, as it raises a sensitive and controversial issue of past history and present politics, but when the onslaught on minority rights is caused by legislative action of the State Legislature or by subordinate legislation as the facts of this case would reveal, the infringement is clearly perceptible and the court is in a position to adjudicate.

( 3 ) WHAT has brought two minority institutions, the Picket Inter College run by a Christian minority and the M. A. H. Inter College run by a Muslim minority into this unwanted litigation is the subtle attack on minority rights by the District Inspector of Schools inviting them to appoint his nominee as a teacher in Picket Inter College and a Class IV employee in the M. A. H. Inter college. The invitation under the law is not optional for the management to accept but is backed by the compulsive force of Regulation 107 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act. This Regulation is the last of the series of regulations 103 to 107 providing for appointment of a family member of an employee of a recognised, aided institution dying-in-harness. These Regulations were introduced by a notification dated 30. 7. 1992 of the state Government which has the power to make Regulations under Section 9 (4) of the intermediate Education Act. They were amended by Government notification dated 2. 2. 1995.

( 4 ) THE major change brought about by the amendments in 1995 was that the post of L. T. grade teacher also was thrown open for compassionate appointment and a proviso was inserted to regulation 103 exempting institutions established or administered by a minority community from its application. Although the proviso was added only to Regulation 103 which provides for appointment to a family member of an employee dying-in-harness but as the Scheme of regulations 103 to 107 is an integrated one, the proviso in effect carves out an exception to all these Regulations. The effect of the proviso was that minority institutions continued to enjoy free hand subject to the regulatory provisions of Section 16ff of the Intermediate Education Act in the matter of appointments. The proviso to Regulation 103 was repealed and a new Regulation 103 without the proviso was substituted by notification dated 9. 8. 2001, which is the notification under challenge in these petitions. The substituting Regulation 103 merely re-enacts the substituted Regulation without the proviso. In effect, the proviso stands repealed.

( 5 ) THE repeal of the proviso, as we may call, it brings about serious repercussion upon the rights of