The Supreme Court in the case Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay versus Union of India observed in a plea seeking minority status for Hindus in states where they are numerically less. The court further expressed disappointment at the Central Government changing its stances.
For seeking minority status for Hinduism, Bahaism and Judaism a Public Interest Litigation along with the Counter affidavit is filled by the Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay to know the minority status of Hindus in the in states like Mizoram, Kashmir, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Punjab, Manipur and Union Territories of Ladakh and Lakshadweep. the National Commission for Minorities Act 1992 and National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions Act 2004 and the power of the Central Government to notify minorities were also questioned in the PIL filled.
for the purposes of Articles 29 & 30 of the Constitution of India the States in which Hindus are in minority can notify them as minorities, it was stated by the Central Government in an affidavit filed on 28th March 2022., the Union Government has taken a different stand in an fresh affidavit filled on 5th May, 2022.
taking into consideration several sociological and other aspects obviating any unintended complications in future with regard to such a vital issue as will ensure that the Central Government is able to place a considered view before this Hon’ble Court and though the power is vested with the Central Government to notify minorities, the stand to be formulated by the Central Government with regard to issues raised in this group of petitions will be finalized after having a wide consultation with State Governments and other stakeholders was submitted in its recent affidavit by the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs.
The bench of Justice Kaul expressed concern and reckoned that in the interregnum the consultation process could have been undertaken further Justice Kaul stated that the Union Government should be more careful while filing affidavits, so that they do not have to back out from the stand taken on a later date.
Justice Kaul further stated that how can the affidavit first be filed that both Centre and State have power, in an matter like this because before the affidavits are filed everything is in the public domain. That has its own consequences. I am not blaming anybody but Somebody should have been more careful as Number of dates were given.
Thereafter the SG Tushar Mehta, contended that it finds way in the public domain, once we serve the copy on the parties.
a status report to be filled in August and the Centre to undertake the consultation process, the bench directed while adjourning the matter.
The matter requires final hearing and has to be finally heard if they say that they want to consult the states, the parliament has made the law and it for your lordships to interpret it was stated by the senior counsel, CS Vaidyanathan, appearing for the petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay.
On 28.03.2022, the first affidavit filed by the Ministry of Minority and in supersession of the first affidavit, stated that the Centre has the power to notify minorities but wider consultations are needed to finalize its position on the issue and it stated that it is for the concerned States to take a call on the matter
The post The Supreme Court disapproves of Centre challenging its stand, seeks report of the consultation process in three months for the minority status of Hindus in some states appeared first on The Daily Guardian.
