When a challenge is raised before a court against the validity or any statute as contravening the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25 and 26 it is from the above perspective that tho court will approach the question and the tests to be applied for adjudging the validity of the statutes will be the same irrespective of whether the person or denomination complaining about the infringement of the said fundamental right belongs to a religious minority or not." In Ramalingayya vs The Commissioner of Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions & Endowments(l) dealing with 'religious denomination ' the Andhra Pradesh High Court held: "Thus it is the distinct common faith and common spiritual organisation and the belief in a particular religious teacher of philosophy on which the religious denomination is founded or based, that is the essence of the matter, but not any caste, or sub caste or a particular deity worship by a particular caste or community." In United States vs Danial Andrew Seegar(2) the U.S. Supreme Court had to construe the provisions of section 6(j) of the Universal Military Training and Service Act of 1948 which, as a prerequisite of exempting a conscientious objector from military service, requires l? his belief in a relation to a Supreme Being involving duties superior to those arising from any human relation.