I. INTRODUCTION:

India is the birth place of four of the world's major religious traditions; namely Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism [1]. Constitutionally India is a secular state. Hinduism is often regarded as the oldest religion in the word (828 million adherents). The Muslim population in India is the third largest in the world, and the largest minority section in India, as per the 2011 Census of India. India is home to eight million Muslim. Christianity is a monotheistic religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus as presented in the New Testament, it is the third largest religion of India making up 2.3% of the population of the country. Buddhists form majority population in the Indian states Arunachal Pradesh and the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir and a large minority (40%) in Sikkim. Around 8 million Buddhists live in India which is about 0.8% of the total population [1].

Sikhism according to 2011 census, there were 19.2 million Sikhs in India. Punjab is the spiritual home of Sikhs and is the only state in India where Sikhs form a majority. Hindus, Janis, Buddhists and Sikhs are governed by their own law known as personal law but they references to Hindus [2].

\The expression "We the people of India have given unto ourselves the Constitution' is not for any particular community or section of the people but for all. Its provisions are intended to protect all, majority as well as minority communities. In India, by the simple fact of being inhabitants of this land called Hindustan or India, all are Hindus in one sense and all are Indians for certain. The proponents of Hindu Right (not as per constitutional meaning) and their belief in Hindu religious majority is actually against the people of India. That is why in 1924, Gandhiji said that it was "unpatriotic even to nurse a dream of Hindu Raj. Sardar Patel, known as the 'Iron Man' of India, too shared the same opinion of Gandhiji when he said [3]: “I do not think it will be possible to consider Hindustan as a Hindu state with Hinduism as the state religion. We must not forget that there are other minorities whose protection is also our primary responsibility”. [3]

There can be no matter of doubt that the best investment to the country can make for its progress is investment on India's vast human resources irrespective of religious, linguistic or ethnic differences. And if India allows the promotion of sectarian ideologies based on its sectarian past to dominate, it can harm the nation [3].

Most of the safeguards for protecting the interests of different minorities are provided in chapter on 'Fundamental Rights' in the Constitution. These rights are justifiable and under Article 32 certain remedies for the enforcement of these rights are provided. For example, Article 32 says that the right to approach the Supreme Court of India by appropriate proceedings for the enforcing of the rights conferred by the fundamental rights is guaranteed, thus guaranteeing the right as constitutional remedies itself is a fundamental right in the constitution of the country. So as Kamalesh Kumar Wadhwa says [3]:

“The power of Judiciary is to stand in the way of government trying to violate rights granted to minorities by the Constitution is an element of great safety and security for the minorities.

Besides as the prominent leader of the Communist Party of India, Mr. A.B. Bardhan, said, "Protection of Minorities is more a test of democracy than the fact whether a majority is ruling the country [4].

The issue of Minority rights has a long and distinct history in India that is markedly different from the context in which this question is being discussed in contemporary democratic theory [5].

In India, by comparison, the minorities are not immigrant populations or outsiders who need to be accommodated by the rest of society. Instead, identified religious and linguistic minorities are an integral part of the state and are included is equal citizens of the polity. Consequently, they are not dependent upon the largest among the rest of the society or the so called majority [5].

Religious minorities, which were the most strident and politically mobilized communities at this time, asserted and were granted special cultural rights. In particular each community was given the right to observe and preserve its language, culture and religious practices. In addition, separate civil codes were retained for different communities; hence, on matters dealing with family individuals were to be governed by their own community codes and practices [5].

Thus minority rights were envisaged as collective rights of communities and, in this form they were vociferously defended by all communities. Since all communities claimed these prerogatives visa-vis the state, community rights acquired considerable legitimacy within the whole society. Further not being conceived as rights of minorities, cultural rights were considered to be essential for equal representation and membership of different communities within the nation – state [5].

II. EXPRESSED IDEAS OF THINKERS ON INDIAN MINORITY:

Minority, according to Claine Palley is, "Any racial, tribal, linguistic, religious, caste or nationality group within a nation-state and which is not under control of the political machinery of that state [6]. Therefore the minorities in a nation, as Iqbal A. Ansari says "are numerically inferior, non-dominant groups with stable features of identity different from the rest of the people within a larger territorial state [7]. Therefore, Ansari concludes that, "non-dominant status in terms of number and power of a distinct group deferent from the rest of the people in the country should constitute the core of a minority [8].

According to Dr. B.R Ambedkar who explained the term 'Minority' in India, in the Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD), "The word is used not merely to indicate the minority in the technical sense of the word; it is also used to cover minorities which are nonetheless, minorities in the cultural and linguistic sense [9]. Also as mentioned in the Cayton Encyclopedia, minority is the term used to cover "racial, religious, or linguistic sections of the population within a State, which differ in these respects from the majority population [9]. Again according to Gangwal, "The Minorities consist of individuals, who have a sense of community, who feel that this sense of a kindness distinguishes them from the majority of the people who live in the same area [5].

'A group numerically inferior to the rest of the population of a state, in a non-dominant position, whose members- being nationals of the state-possess ethnic, religious or linguistic characteristics differing from those of the rest of the population and show, if only implicitly, a sense of solidarity directed towards preserving their culture, traditional religion or language [8].

Thus there had been question for debate as to what should be the concept of “Monitories in India?”

III. PRE INDEPENDENCE SCENARIO OF MINORITIES:

The struggle on 'minority issues' in India is for the rights of minority members' as equal citizens of India, especially in regard to the ethno-religious plurality recognized in the Constitution. The politics of majoritarianism practiced by the combined Hindutva front consisting of the Bhartiya Janata Party, the Shiva Sena, and other frontal organizations like the RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal of the Sangh Parivar are causing fear and apprehension among the Christian-Muslim minorities as they would be marginalized and discriminated if such politics gain national power. Over the last decade and a half, such politics practiced in the name of majority have been attempting to construct a 'homogeneous' Indian identity basing itself on the majority religious ethos that can provide a cultural unity to the Indian nation-state. By articulating Hindutva explicitly as an ideology of cultural nationalism, they seek to divest India's established secular and culturally inclusive egalitarian national ethos. At the same time of oppose such political approach is reverted back by some political parties to safeguard rights of minorities with ulterior motive for the gain sake of sympathy of minorities. Thus infused with a strong missionary zeal of unitary nationalism Hindutva seeks to legitimize majority communalism in the name of nationalism. Such an attempt therefore stands against the national politics of democracy and secularism that protects the cultural ethos and practices of the minorities. Therefore Gurpreet Mahajan emphasizes that in India minority rights were granted to safeguard 'against the possibility of the state assimilating minority religious communities [4].

The Hindutva front does not accept the dispensation enshrined in the Constitution of India vis-a-vis religious minorities. They are not prepared to accept the Christian-Muslim minority presence in India with distinct identities. The killings, rapes, humiliations, attacks and campaigns of lies and misinformation spreading hatred and dislike towards minorities by the extremist Hindu communal forces are seen as part of a deliberate strategy to terrorize them into submission. Therefore if this intolerance of the Hindu fundamentalist groups are not checked in time and allowed to grow, they will tear apart not only the Indian polity but also the Hindu society, which is essentially a diverse entity. Here we must note that the majority of Indians who are Hindus and who believe and practice Hinduism are also adherents of Indian secularism and democracy. Therefore newspaper columnist Anoop Dev says, "those who are engineering attacks against Christians do not represent the eighty crore Hindus... Fortunately for India the majority of Hindus, including genuine intellectuals, do not approve of these 'Saviors' of Hindutva" because true Hinduism according to him is pro-Christianity [4].

The demand for guarantee of fundamental rights had first appeared in the constitution of India Bill, 1895, framed by the Indian National Congress and was thereafter expressed in several resolution passed by the "Congress, particularly between 1917 and 1919 By the mid-twenties, the Congress and its leaders had increasingly conscious of their Indianness and, consequently their demands for civil rights were no more directed solely at establishing the rights of Indians [7].

IV. ROLE OF THE CONGRESS ON TRIAL REGARDING MINORITIES:

In accordance with the terms of the Cabinet Mission's statement of May 16, the elections to the Constituent Assembly were held in the summer of 1946 and the Assembly was finally convened on December 9, 1946. Almost throughout the period for which the Assembly met, the problem of, safeguards for minorities remained an important and controversial issue, and continued to engage the attention of the Members the Assembly had completed the draft of the entire constitution by November, 1949 [7].

The Congress utilized the very first opportunity in the Assembly to express its 'intentions' when the Objectives Resolution is moved by Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13, 1946. For the proposed constitution clauses declared: "Wherein adequate safeguards shall be provided for minorities, backward and tribal areas, and depressed and other backward classes".

The same spirit was evident in the resolution for the setting up of advisory committee on fundamental rights and minorities. Moving the resolution in the Assembly on January 29, 1947 Govind Ballabha Pant laid particulars emphasis on the importance of the question of minorities.

A satisfactory solution of the question pertaining to minorities will ensure the health, vitality and strength of the free State of India . . . So far, the minorities have been incited and have been influenced in a manner which has hampered the growth of cohesion and unity. But now it is necessary that a new chapter should start and we should all realize our responsibility. Unless the minorities are fully satisfied, we cannot make progress; we cannot even make peace in an undisturbed manner.

The Advisory Committee met on February 27, 1947, under the chairmanship of Sardar Patel, and divided itself into four subcommittees two of them being Sub-Committee on Minorities and Sub-Committee on Fundamental Rights. It was in those two Subcommittees that the problem of safeguards for minorities was gradually settled.

The Sub Committee under the chairmanship of H.C. Mookerji, a Christian leader from Bengal, met the same day it was created, February 27, 1947. The Sub-Committee, finding its tasks difficult, formulated a questionnaire and wanted to ascertain the views of the members. Memoranda were submitted on behalf of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Sikhs, and Anglo-Indians demanding constitutional safeguards. No specific communal safeguards were asked for on behalf of Indian Christians and Parsees. Also, no memorandum was presented on behalf of the Muslim League as it was still not participating in the proceedings of the Assembly.

A memorandum on behalf of Sikhs was submitted by Harnam Singh and Ujjal Singh, two members of the Sub-Committee, which included a demand for retaining the Punjab as the "homeland and holy land of the Sikhs", the same reservations and facilities for the three backward communities among the Sikhs as were to be provided for Scheduled Castes, reservation of six percent of the seats in the central legislature, five per cent of posts in the central cabinet and no reduction of representation of Sikhs in the defense services.

The Sub-Committee had a difficult task when it met on April, 17, 18 and 19, 1947, to consider the widely divergent views. In these sittings the Sub-Committee also considered the interim proposals of the Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee in so far as those proposals had a bearing on minority rights. After considering what rights were conceded to minorities by way of fundamental rights, the Sub-Committee again met on July 21, 1947, to consider the proposals which had been submitted before it. By this time the question of partition had been decided and the Muslim League was also represented in the Sub-Committee. The issues which the Sub-Committee formulated on the basis of the replies received to the questionnaire issued to the members covered the following:

(i) Representation in Legislatures, joint versus separate electorates and weightage.

(ii) Reservation of seats in the Cabinet;

(iii) Reservation in services.

(iv) Administrative machinery to ensure protection of minority rights.

The Sub-Committee could not make a detailed report due to shortage of time and its report submitted before the advisory committee on July 27, 1947. The report contained the following decisions:

(i) The demand for separate electorates and weightage should be rejected and the principle of joint electorates with seats reserved for the minorities on a population basis should be accepted;

(ii) The demand for reservation of seats in the Cabinet should be accepted.

(iii) The demand for reservation of posts in the public services on a population basis should be accepted;

(iv) Special officers should be appointed to look after the safeguards and interests of minorities [7].

V. SUBMISSION BY ADVISORY COMMITTEES INCLUDING SUGGETIONS:

When the report of the Sub-Committee came up for consideration before the Advisory Committee for its consideration in July, 1947, the Committee endorsed almost all the conclusions reached by the Sub-Committee except with regard to Anglo-Indians for which it appointed a sub-committee to report on the position of this community in Certain services and the existing educational facilities for them. The Advisory Committee accepted by very large majority the recommendation of the Sub-Committee on Minorities that there should be no separate electorates for elections to the legislatures on the ground that these had in the. Past widened communal inferences. But to allay any apprehensions of the minorities about the system of unrestricted joint electorates or the quantum of their representation, the Advisory Committee recommended as a general rule that seats for the different recognized minorities (Muslims, Scheduled Castes, Sikhs, Anglo-Indians, Indian Christians, Parsees and tribesmen living in the plains of Assam) should be reserved in the different legislatures on the basis of their population [7].

The Committee also accepted the recommendation for setting up of statutory commission to investigate, inter alia, into the conditions of all socially and educationally backward classes and to recommend the steps to eliminate the hardships [7].

VI. AFTER INDEPENDENCE OF INDIA:

Keen debate started just after India Independence on issue of as to what should be the consideration regarding majority and minority.

The report of the Advisory committee it was considered by the Constituent Assembly on August 27 and 28, 1947. The Assembly adopted all the recommendations of the Advisory Committee without any modification. The draft Constitution prepared' by the Constitutional Advisor in October, 1947 in which the decisions of the Constituent Assembly on the problem of minorities also incorporated.

When the Drafting Committee met on February 5 and 6, 1948, it formulated the various provisions into ten articles and placed them in Part XIV under the title "Special Provisions relating to Minorities." This part of the Draft constitution was based on the decisions of the Constituent Assembly and the recommendations of the two subcommittees on tribal people: Article 292 reserved seats in the House of the People' for Muslims, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and in the States of Madras and Bombay for Indian Christians. Article 294 made a similar provision for these communities in the Legislative Assemblies of Part I States. Article 283 authorized the President to nominate not more than two members of Anglo-Indian community to the House of the People. Article 295 contained a similar provision in relation to State Legislatures. Article 296 required that, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, the claim of the minority communities should be taken into consideration in the making of appointments to public services. Article 297 continued in force the reservation of posts for Anglo-Indians in the Railways, Customs and Posts and Telegraphs Services on the same basis as immediately before August 15, 1947. The reservation was to last for ten years. Article 298 made provisions as to educational grants for minorities. This special conclusion was to last ten years. Article 299 made provisions for appointment of a Special Officer for Minorities to look after the safeguards. Article 300 empowered the President to appoint, a Commission to report on the administration of the Scheduled Areas and the welfare of the Scheduled Tribes. A similar provision was made under Article 301 for appointment of a Commission to investigate the conditions of all socially and educationally backward classes [7].

The Advisory Committee therefore recommended that reservation for Muslims, Sikhs, Christians or any other religious community should be abolished and should be provided only for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The reason stated for retention of reservation in the Legislatures for these communities was that they were backward and therefore needed opportunity to actively participate in the political life of the country. The Committee also recommended for retention of the provision for nomination by the President and Governors of the members of Anglo-Indian community in view of the special position enjoyed by the community [8].

When these recommendations were placed before the Assembly the majority of the speakers which included members of all the communities-Muslims, Christians, Anglo-Indians, Scheduled Castes, as well as Hindus-offered full support to the proposal to abolish reservations on religious grounds. Jawaharlal Nehru was so much moved by the new change that he described the proposal as a "historic turn in our destiny [7].

This Sub-Committee prepared an interim report which dealt with the question of fundamental rights from the point of view of minorities and was submitted on April 1947 The report recommended for the following.

(i) All citizens are entitled to use their mother tongue and the script thereof, and to adopt study or use any other language and script of their choice.

(ii) Minorities in every unit shall be adequately protected in respect of their language and culture, and no government may enact any laws or regulations that may act oppressively or prejudicially in this respect.

(iii) No Minority whether of religion, community or language shall be deprived of rights or discriminated-against in regard to the admission into State educational institutions, nor shall any religious instruction be compulsorily imposed on them.

(iv) All minorities whether of religion, community or language shall be free in any unit to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice, and they shall be entitled to State aid in the same manner and measure as is given to similar State-aided institutions [10].

The Advisory Committee ultimately came to recommend the following:

1. Minorities in every unit shall be protected in respect of their language, script and culture, and no laws or regulations may be enacted that may operate oppressively or prejudicially in this respect

2. No minority whether based on religion, community or language shall be discriminated against in regard to admission into state educational institutions, nor shall any-religious instruction be compulsorily imposed on them.

3. (a) All minorities whether based on religion, community or language shall be free in any unit to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice,

(b) The State shall not, while providing State aid to schools discriminates against schools under the management of minorities whether based on religion, community or language [11].

When the whole clause came to be considered by the “Drafting Committee” in its meeting held on November 1, 1947 it made certain modifications of a fundamental nature. As it appeared in Article 23 of the Draft Constitution the text read as following:

(i) Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having distinct language, script and culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.

(ii) No minority whether based on religion, community or language shall be discriminated against in regard to the admission of any person belonging to such minority into any educational institution maintained by the State. (3) (a) All minorities whether based on religion, community or language shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice, (b) The State shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion, community or language [12].

VII. THE FINAL INTENTION OF THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE:

The Draft Committee subsequently, at his revision stage, divided article 23 into two separate articles article 29 and 30:

Article 29(1): Any section of citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same A (2): No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them.

Article 30(1): All minorities, whether based on religion or language shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. (2): The State shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, whether based on religion or language [13].

According to my views the Interpretation of communalism does not mean allegation as against any single belief or diversion if any political party in aligning as against Hinduism and marking that philosophy as ideology of living to be communalist and at the same time that party is favoring other belief or diversion. This sort of ideological thinking is also at the same rate communalist and there after only that will be regarded as democratic setup non "communalism" as had be narrated and required in the preamble of our Indian Constitution of India.

Now we have to think of to consider as to how we should define minority and what should be the basis of such terminology regarding minority as required by our constitution of India. There are our constitution of India is universally expected as greatest democratic setup of Government.

VIII. SUGGESTIONS FOR SUBSTANCE OF LACKNESS:

In certain areas it has found some deficiency for that elaborately expressing my views as per my knowledge.

1. Ideologies of superiority and inferiority with their attachment of negative meaning to difference have left their legacies. The structures and systems designed to dominate and subjugate fellow Human Being in the ages of slavery, colonialism, imperialism and apartheid have continuing effects. The present use of political, Social, Economical, Military and cultural mechanisms to perpetuate unequal power relations remain serious contemporary challenges for the many who desire real social justice, Human Rights and freedom to all. Education can be means to retain as well as to eliminate inequality. As it can serve two contradictory purposes, two opposite results may ensue. Education can reinforce or diminish inequality. Purposeful government strategies are necessary for the same because without that, "a family's social, cultural and economic status tends to act as a riffle barrel setting educational trajectory from which it is difficult for a child to escape."

2. Realization of the right to education is a continuing process and by that progress can be depicted through two overlapping and broadening concentric circles, the first showing an incremental inclusion of those previously excluded from education as well as from the society and the second an extension of the right to education and its gradual conversion into right based education which can show them the right path to get connect and clear understanding of human dignity.

3. The principle of indivisibility of Human Rights requires conformity of the right to education and government should make the education available, accessible, acceptable and adaptable, mere access to educational institutions does not amount to right to education rather it requires enforceable individual entitlements to education.

4. The function of law both in national and state is to translate the principle of non discrimination into binding norms or rules of law on how we should behave. Such rules are designed first to offer legally binding protections and secondly these rules impose obligations on governments and on all of us not to act on a discriminatory manner and to find effective uses of law to end the discrimination on the basis of minority and majority, which also requires a contribution provides a balanced assessment of what the law and constitution and its monitoring committee have achieved to date along with an analysis of other national initiatives and mechanisms working for the elimination of such discrimination.

5. State should review governmental, national and local policies and amend, rescind and nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating any discrimination.

6. The government should take initiative measures and make strong policies which can stop any incompetent political leadership and also not allow them to make victims of rested politics of vote banks.

IX. REFERENCES:

[1] Deka Phani, Book Title: “The Great Indian Corridor in the East”, Publisher: Mittal Publications, Publishing Year: 2007, ISBN: 978-8183241793.

[2] P.M. Bakshi, Book Title: “Constitution of India”, Publisher: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Publishing Year: 1996, ISBN: 978-8175340039.

[3] Moin Shakir, Book Title: “Politics of Minorities, Some Perspectives”, Publisher: Ajanta Publication, Delhi, Publishing Year: 1980.

[4] Sebastian Vempeny, Book Title: “Minorities in Contemporary India”, Publisher: Kanishka Publishers, Distributers, New Delhi, Publishing Year; 2003, ISBN: 81-7391-534-2.

[5] D.L. Sheth, Gurpreet Mahajan, Book Title: “Minority Identities and the Nation-State”, Publisher: Oxford University Press, New Delhi, Publishing Year: 1999, ISBN: 019-564-5413.

[6] Kamlesh Kumar Wadhwa, Quoted in Jose K. John, (unpublished), Year: 1999.

[7] Anwarul Yaqin, Book Title: “Constitutional Protection of Minority Educational Institutions in India”, Publisher: Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, Publishing Year: 1986.

[8] Iqbal A. Ansari (ed.), Book Title: “Readings on Minorities Perspectives and Documents”, Vol.: 1, Publisher: Institute of Objective Studies (I.O.S.), New Delhi, Publishing Year: 1996.

[9] The Hindu, New Delhi, November 27, 1998

[10] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 'jump to navigation, search. This article is about republic of India's religious demo graphics, for religious originating in the India Subcontinent.

[11] Carens Joseph H.1997 Liberalism and Culture; Constellations, vol-4. No.1,PP-35-47

[12] Kumlicka will 1995, Multicultural Citizenship Oxford: Clarendon Press.

[13] Constitutional protection of minorities educational institutions in India, 1986, Deep and Deep Publications-D-1, 24 Rajouri Garden, New Delhi,-110027.

Received on 21.05.2014 Modified on 23.06.2014

Int. J. Ad. Social Sciences 2(2): April-June, 2014; Page 81-86