Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.85 seconds)Article 30 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 25 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Commissioner Of Wealth Tax, West Bengal vs Champa Kumari Singhi & Ors on 19 January, 1972
In Commissioner of Wealth Tax, West Bengal v. Smt.
Champa Kumari Singhi & Others reported in AIR 1968
Calcutta 74, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court
observed that "Jains rejected the authority of the Vedas which
forms the bedrock of Hinduism and denied the efficacy of
various ceremonies which the Hindus consider essential. It
will require too much of boldness to hold that the Jains,
dissenters from Hinduism, are Hindus, even though they
disown the authority of the Vedas".
Arya Samaj Education Trust, Delhi And ... vs The Director Of Education, Delhi ... on 17 November, 1975
In the said judgment, the Court referred to the observations of
various scholars in this behalf. The Court quoted Heinrich
Zimmer in "Philosophies of India" wherein he stated that
"Jainism denies the authority of the Vedas and the orthodox
traditions of Hinduism. Therefore, it is reckoned as a
heterodox Indian religion". The Court also quoted J. N.
Farquhar in "Modern Religious Movements in India" wherein
he stated that "Jainism has been a rival of Hinduism from the
beginning". In the said judgment, in conclusion, the Court
held that "for the purpose of Article 30(1), the Jains are a
minority based on religion in the Union Territory of Delhi".
St. Stephen'S College vs University Of Delhi on 6 December, 1991
In St. Stephen's College v. University of Delhi (1992) 1
SCC 558, this Court in para 54 at page 596 observed as
under:
P.A. Inamdar & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 12 August, 2005
The Court in the said judgment also dealt with the object
of Article 30(1) of the Constitution. The Court in para 97 of
the judgment observed the relevant para which reads as
under:
Bal Patil & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 8 August, 2005
(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992 came
up for consideration before a Three-Judge Bench of this Court
in Bal Patil & Another v. Union of India & Others (2005) 6
SCC 690 wherein this Court noticed that the framers of the
Constitution engrafted group of Articles 25 to 30 in the
Constitution of India against the background of partition of
the country so as to allay the apprehensions and fears in the
minds of Muslims and other religious communities by
providing to them a special guarantee and protection of their
religious, cultural and educational rights. It was held: