As per case facts, the appellant, an organization representing a section of the Jain community, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking a mandamus to direct the ... Central Government to notify Jains as a 'minority' community under Section 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992. The High Court disposed of the petition, stating that the issue was pending before an eleven-judge bench of the Supreme Court in the TMA Pai Foundation case. The appeal to the Supreme Court was adjourned, awaiting that judgment, with the Central Government committing to abide by its outcome.The question arose, "What is the meaning and content of the expression "minority" in Article 30 of the Constitution of India?"Finally, the Supreme Court ruled in the TMA Pai Foundation case that for determining minority status, whether linguistic or religious, the unit should be the State, not the whole of India. Religious and linguistic minorities are to be considered state-wise. Consequently, the Central Government's position evolved, stating that State Governments are responsible for deciding the minority status of the Jain community within their respective states, based on local circumstances. The Court emphasized that the historical purpose of minority protection was to safeguard specific communities post-partition, and merely numerical or social status should not be the sole criterion for minority identification, as this could lead to endless claims and societal division. The Supreme Court declined to issue a direction for Jains to be notified as a national minority, stressing that Minorities Commissions should work towards fostering unity and eventually reducing the need for such classifications.