New Delhi, Jan 24 (Reporter) The argument on the grant of minority status to the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) continued for the fifth day in the Supreme Court on Tuesday. A 7-judge Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Surya Kant, Justice JB Pardiwala, Justice Dipankar Datta, Justice Manoj Misra, and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma is tasked with a resolution on whether an educational institution having minority status under Article 30 of the Constitution and whether a centrally funded university established by parliamentary statute can be designated as a minority institution. Today, when the Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta told the court that he does not accept the amendment made in the Aligarh Muslim University Act in 1981 by which AMU was conferred minority status, the bench said that a government law officer cannot say that he does not stand by a law enacted by the parliament. The SG asked the bench whether all emergency-era constitutional amendments have to be justified by law officers. To this, the CJI Chandrachud answered, That is why the 44th Amendment (which deleted many Emergency Era amendments) came into being, to remedy all evils. SG Tushar Mehta said that AMU gets a Rs 1,500 crore grant each year from the central government. The 1920 AMU Act could not be judged using Article 30 since there was no concept of minority or fundamental rights at the time when the law was passed, he added. SG Mehta further said, “One of their members wrote to the British, saying that we want British rule to continue and that it is a boon for our country. This was the scenario; that is how they surrendered it. There are letters. I am not citing them here," Mehta said. The CJI said, "We cannot say that a pre-constitutional institution cannot have rights under Article 30. Of course, it can have that, provided it satisfies two yardsticks: that it was founded by a minority and that the minority administers it. Is this statutory way chosen so destructive of them having a minority status post-Constitution? It is only a regulatory statute. Are these provisions only for the proper governance of the institution?" The CJI then stated that the bench would decide tomorrow whether the amendment act's validity needs to be examined. The hearing will continue on January 30...////...