Abdul Kalam Azad acted as mediator in negotiations

We have traced the history of India and its struggle for independence to show how the concept of minority developed prior to and at the time of framing of Constitution and later in the course of its working, History tells us that there were certain religious communities in India who were required to be given full assurance of protection of their religious and cultural rights. India is a country of people with the largest number of religions and languages living together and forming a Nation.  Such diversity of religions, culture and way of life is not to be found in any part of the world.  John Stuart Mill described India as "a world placed at closed quarters".  India is a world in miniature. The group of Articles 25 to 30 of the Constitution, as the historical background of partition of India shows, was only to give a guarantee of security to the identified minorities and thus to maintain integrity of the country.  It was not in contemplation of the framers of the Constitution to add to the list of religious minorities.  The Constitution through all its organs is committed to protect religious, cultural and educational rights of all. Articles 25 to 30 guarantee cultural and religious freedoms to both majority and minority groups.  Ideal of a democratic society, which has adopted right of equality as its fundamental creed, should be elimination of majority and minority and so-called forward and backward classes.  Constitution has accepted one common citizenship for every Indian regardless of his religion, language, culture or faith.  The only birth in India.  We have to develop such enlightened citizenship where each citizen of whatever religion or language is more concerned about his duties and responsibilities to protect rights of the other group than asserting his own rights.  The constitutional goal is to develop citizenship in which everyone enjoys full fundamental freedoms of religion, faith and worship and no one is apprehensive of encroachment of his rights by others in minority or majority.

Many other revelations concerning competing claims for reservation of seats on religious basis can be gathered from the personal diary of prominent national leaders late Abdul Kalam Azad. The diary was made public, in accordance with his last wish only after 25 years of independence.  The publication of Azad's diary made it necessary for constitutional expert H.M. Seervai to re-write his chapter under caption 'Partition of India - Legend and Reality' in his book on 'Constitutional Law of India'.  Many apprehensions and fears were expressed and disturbed the minds of the Muslims. They thought in democracy to be set up in India, the Hindus being in majority would always dominate and retain political power on the basis of their voting strength.  There were also apprehensions expressed by many prominent Muslim leaders that there might be interference with and discouragement to their cultural, religious and educational rights.  Abdul Kalam Azad acted as mediator in negotiations between the national leaders of the times namely late Nehru and Patel on one side and late Jinnah and Liaqat Ali on the other.  Nehru and Patel insisted that in the new Constitution, there would be one united India belonging to people of various religious faiths and cultures with all having full freedom of their social, cultural religious and other constitutional rights.  They advocated one single citizenship to every Indian regardless of his language or religion.  The opposing group of Muslim leaders, in the interest of members of their community, insisted on providing to them participation in democratic processes proportionate to their ratio of population and thus counter-balance the likely domination of Hindu majority.  They also insisted that separate electorate constituencies based on their population be formed and seats be reserved for them in different parts of India.  Late Abdul Kalam Azad tried his utmost to find a midway and thus break the stalemate between the two opposing groups but Nehru and Patel remained resolute and rejected the proposal of Jinnah and Liaqat Ali.  The tragic result was that provinces with the highest Muslim population in the erstwhile States of Sindh, Punjab and Baluchistan had to be ceded to form a separate theocratic nation - Pakistan.  

The history of the struggle for Independence of India bears ample testimony of the fact that the concept of 'minorities' and the demands for special care and protection of their religious and cultural rights arose after bitter experience of religious conflicts which intermittently arose in about 150 years of British Rule.  The demand of partition gained momentum at the time the Britishers decided to leave by handing over self-rule to Indians.  The Britishers always treated Hindus and Muslims as two different groups of citizens requiring different treatment.  To those groups were added Anglo-Indians and Christians as a result of large scale inter-marriages and conversions of several sections of communities in India to Christianity.  Prior to passing of the Independence Act of India to hand over self-rule to Indians, Britishers in the course of gradually conceding some democratic right to Indians, contemplated formation of separate constituencies on reservations of certain seats in Legislature in proportion to the population of Hindus and Muslims.  That attempt was strongly resisted by both prominent Hindu and Muslim national leaders who had jointly and actively participated in the struggle for independence of India.
21. The attempt of the Britishers to form separate electorates and make reservations of seats on the basis of population of Hindus and Muslims, however, ultimately led to revival of demand for reservation of constituencies and seats in the first elected Government to be formed in free India.  Resistance to such demands by Hindu and some Muslim leaders ultimately led to partition of India and formation of separate Muslim State presently known as Pakistan.