Mumbai University Solved Question Papers
Indian Constitutional Law New Challenges
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
LLM · Foundation Course
2019 Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
LLM Foundation Course Indian Constitutional Law New Challenges 2019 Question Paper with Solutions
MU LLM student group
Free to join
First published on munotes.in on 12 August 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of the University of Mumbai. It is not affiliated with the University of Mumbai, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by the University of Mumbai at the 2019 examination.
The answers in this volume state the law as it stands today, not as it stood when the paper was set, and in this subject the difference is large. Five changes alter answers here. Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal, 8 November 2024, overruled Azeez Basha on the minority status of an institution incorporated by statute. State of Punjab v. Davinder Singh, 1 August 2024, permitted sub-classification within the Scheduled Castes. The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023 replaced the appointment committee directed in Anoop Baranwal. The Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 came into force on 16 April 2026 and is not yet operative. And the advisory opinion of 20 November 2025 held that no timeline may be set for assent to a Bill. Where a provision has since been replaced, the answer gives the position then and now, and says which is which.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as the University of Mumbai set it at the 2019 examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2019 examination, reproduced as the University of Mumbai set them, in the order it set them. Nothing has been reworded, added or left out. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 14 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
SECTION I
Q.P. Code 29510. Attempt any four questions, all questions carry equal marks
any four of seven · 100 Marks
1.Discuss the rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. Cite leading case laws.[25]
Answer
For full marks, cover: Article 30(1) and how it differs from Article 29; who is a minority and by what unit; what "establish and administer" means and how the 2024 Aligarh Muslim University decision changed it; the regulation line from Kerala Education Bill to T.M.A. Pai and P.A. Inamdar; and the two provisions that now cut across the right.
The right. Article 30(1): all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. Article 30(1A), inserted by the Forty-fourth Amendment, requires that compensation on compulsory acquisition of such an institution's property must not restrict or abrogate the right. Article 30(2): the State shall not, in granting aid, discriminate against an institution on the ground that it is under minority management.
Distinguish Article 29. Article 29(1) protects the right of any section of citizens with a distinct language, script or culture to conserve it, and is not confined to minorities. Article 29(2) forbids denial of admission to a State or State-aided institution on grounds only of religion, race, caste or language, and is an individual right of the citizen. Article 30(1) is a community right, confined to minorities, and is a right against the State.
Who is a minority. The Constitution supplies no definition and the determining unit is the State, not the country. D.A.V. College, Bhatinda v. State of Punjab (1971) 2 SCC 269 held Hindus in Punjab to be a religious minority for this purpose; T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481, by eleven judges, confirmed the State as the unit, since States were reorganised on linguistic lines. Numerical inferiority is the test; social or economic backwardness is not required.
"Establish and administer" is conjunctive, and the law changed in 2024. S. Azeez Basha v. Union of India (AIR 1968 SC 662) held that the words go together, that a community which has not established an institution cannot claim to administer it, and that Aligarh Muslim University, brought into existence by an Act of 1920, was not established by the Muslim minority. That was overruled in Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal, decided 8 November 2024 by seven judges, 4:3: incorporation by statute does not by itself destroy minority character, the enquiry is who brought the institution into existence, and it is unnecessary to show that administration vests in the minority, because the right to administer is a consequence of establishment.
The regulation line. In re Kerala Education Bill, 1957 (AIR 1958 SC 956): the right is not absolute and reasonable regulation for standards of teaching, qualification of teachers and conditions of service is permissible; aid may be conditioned but not on terms requiring surrender of the right. Rev. Sidhajbhai Sabhai v. State of Bombay (AIR 1963 SC 540): a compulsory reservation of eighty per cent of seats for government nominees struck down. State of Kerala v. Very Rev. Mother Provincial (1970) 2 SCC 417: no takeover of management. Ahmedabad St. Xavier's College Society v. State of Gujarat (1974) 1 SCC 717, nine judges: choice of teachers, disciplinary control and medium protected, subject to regulation for excellence. T.M.A. Pai Foundation (2002): establishing an institution is an occupation under Article 19(1)(g); unaided minority institutions have the widest autonomy in admission and fees; no capitation and no profiteering, though a reasonable surplus is permitted. Islamic Academy of Education v. State of Karnataka (2003) 6 SCC 697: fee and admission committees. P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra (2005) 6 SCC 537: the State cannot impose its own reservation quota on unaided institutions, minority or otherwise.
The two provisions that cut across the right. Parliament reversed Inamdar by the Ninety-third Amendment, 2005, inserting Article 15(5), which permits reservation in private unaided institutions but excepts minority institutions; upheld in Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008) 6 SCC 1 and Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India (2014) 8 SCC 1. And Pramati held that the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 does not apply to minority institutions at all, aided or unaided, because Article 21A cannot abrogate Article 30(1); Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 102 had upheld section 12(1)(c) against non-minority unaided schools.
Conclusion. Article 30 rests on a plain constitutional judgment: a community's language and culture will not survive unless it can educate its own, and a majoritarian legislature cannot be relied on to secure that. The case law has settled a workable balance, regulation for excellence yes, takeover no, profiteering no, a State-imposed quota on an unaided institution no. What has moved in the last decade is the reach of the right rather than its content: Pramati placed minority schools outside the right to education legislation, which puts a growing part of the school system outside its principal equalising provision, and the 2024 Aligarh Muslim University decision reopened minority status for every institution incorporated by statute. Those two developments are where this branch of law is now going.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the solved papers for your group.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester. Choose your group on the next page.
Notes + Solved papers: ₹798 Already bought it? Sign in
Or solved papers only: ₹499
Or notes only: ₹499
The question paper itself stays free, as does the syllabus and module one of every subject.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.