Given below are two statements, one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R): Assertion (A): Article 30 of the Constitution of India does not define the term ‘minorities’. Reason (R): The Constitution recognises only linguistic and religious minorities. Select the correct answer from the codes given below:

The assertion is true. Article 30 gives religious and linguistic minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions, but the Constitution never defines the term 'minority'. The Supreme Court (for example in the TMA Pai case, 2002) has had to work out who counts as a minority, and it treats this as a question of state-wise or community-wise determination.

The reason is loosely true. Articles 30 and 350B name religious and linguistic minorities. However, the word 'only' is debatable, because Article 29(1) protects 'any section of citizens' with a distinct language, script or culture, which goes beyond those two categories. Even so, the reason does not explain the assertion. The absence of a definition is not caused by the Constitution recognising two types of minorities. So (R) is not the correct explanation of (A), and option B is the answer.

Core concept: the difference between the constitutional text and judicial interpretation of minority rights. This links to the Mains topic of religious and linguistic minority rights and the debate over minority status at the state level.

Trap: assuming that because both statements talk about minorities, the reason must explain the assertion.