SUPREME COURT on Tuesday expressed displeasure over the Center altering its stand on a plea that sought minority standing for Hindus in states and Union Territories the place their numbers have gone beneath different communities, saying the federal government’s newest affidavit within the matter “seems to back out of what was stated earlier” and it doesn’t admire this.
“They have turned turtle,” stated Justice SK Kaul, presiding over a two-judge bench, referring to the 2 affidavits filed by the Ministry of Minority Affairs on March 25 and May 9 in response to a petition filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, which has additionally challenged the federal government’s energy to inform minorities below the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992.
In the March 25 affidavit, the Center had sought to shift the onus of granting minority standing on states, saying they too have concurrent powers to take action. However, in a contemporary affidavit filed on Monday “in supersession of the earlier affidavit”, it stated “the power is vested with the Center to notify minorities”.
In the contemporary affidavit, the federal government additionally stated that the matter has “far-reaching ramifications”, and that it wanted extra time for discussions with state governments and different stakeholders.
Referring to the 2 affidavits, the bench, additionally comprising Justice MM Sundresh, stated, “Another counter affidavit has been filed now… which seems to back out of what was stated earlier, something we do not appreciate.”
Expressing the court docket’s disappointment, Justice Kaul stated, “…What I am not able to understand is (that) Union of India is not able to decide what it wants to do. All this thought should have been given before… This creates an uncertainty. And you know all this by its very nature comes into the public domain before we put our eyes to it… So this creates its own dynamics.”
“How can in a matter like this an affidavit be filed first that the state and Center both have powers? Now when he (petitioner) says state does not have power, you file an affidavit saying… I mean number of days were given to decide the stand.”
On the prayer to grant extra time for discussions with states, the court docket stated, “If you wish to seek the advice of states, you’ll have to take a name no matter… Solution cannot be, all the things is advanced, we are going to achieve this. This can’t be the reply from the Government of India. You determine what you wish to do. If you wish to seek the advice of, seek the advice of. Who is stopping you from consulting.”
The bench allowed the Centre’s request for time to hold out the discussions and glued subsequent listening to on August 30. The court docket additionally directed the Center to file a standing report “at least three days” earlier than the subsequent date of listening to.
“You will have to take whatever consultation etc…You will have to do some exercise,” stated Justice Kaul.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, showing for the Centre, replied that there was a gathering wherein three Union ministers participated together with their respective secretaries. He additionally attended. “There was an in depth dialogue. And what could be the potential or doable fallout someway have been mentioned,” he stated.
Justice Kaul stated, “Because of the diversity in our country, the principle which is sought to be propounded is what steps are being taken, to see that where a minorities commission protects the rights of the minorities, similarly in states where others may be minority , their rights are protected.”
But Upadhyay identified that his petition challenged the very validity of the National Minority Commission Act.
The petition depends on the 2011 Census of India, in accordance with which Hindus are a minority in Lakshadweep, Mizoram, Nagaland, Meghalaya, J&Ok, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and Punjab.
Upadhyay contended that accordingly, Hindus needs to be given minority standing in these states and UTs as per the 2002 TMA Pai ruling.
Upadhyay first moved the Supreme Court in 2017 praying for applicable pointers for the identification of minorities and for quashing the central notification issued below Section 2(c) of the National Minorities Commission (NCM) Act declaring Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Parsis as “minority” group. He identified that Jains have been additionally added within the listing in 2014, however not Hindus regardless of them being a minority in some states and UTs.
The court docket then requested him to method the NCM which stated that it “does not have the jurisdiction to deal with the prayer…” and that below Section 2(c) of the NCM Act, solely the Center can declare a group as a ‘minority’ ‘.
Upadhyay once more moved the Supreme Court the place a bench headed by then Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi sought the help of Attorney General KK Venugopal.
But by the point it was listed subsequent for listening to, CJI Gogoi had demitted workplace and the brand new bench headed by his successor CJI SA Bobde dismissed the plea with out assigning any causes.
Following this, he once more filed a petition in August 2020, additionally difficult the Constitutional validity of Section 2(c) of the NCM Act. The Supreme Court issued discover to the Center within the matter on August 28, 2020.
,
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
