The Union Law Ministry in the case Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors submitted before the Supreme Court that it cannot direct the Parliament to frame or enact any law. As the PILs filed before it seeking a Uniform Civil Code in the country must be dismissed as non-maintainable.
The PIL was filed by BJP leader and Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, wherein seeking uniformity in the personal laws regulating marriage divorce, maintenance and alimony, in response to which the Ministry stated,
For enacting a particular legislation, a writ of mandamus cannot be issued. Thus, this is a matter of policy for the elected representatives of the people to decide and no direction in this regard can be issued by the Court and it is for the legislature to enact or for not enacting a piece of legislation.
It is stated under Article 44 of the Indian Constitution is a directive principle requiring State to endeavour to secure Uniform Civil Code for all the citizens.
Further, the Ministry stated that the purpose behind Article 44 is to strengthen the object of “Secular Democratic Republic” as enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution. Thus, this provision is provided to effect integration of India by bringing communities on the common platform on matters which are at present governed by diverse personal laws. In view of the sensitivity and the importance of the subject matter, in-depth study of various personal laws is required.
It was assured by the Ministry to the Court that it is conscious of the matter and that the 21st Law Commission undertook detailed examination of the same by inviting representations from several stakeholders.
It stated that since the said Commission’s term ended in August 2018, the matter will be placed before the 22nd Commission.
It added that, as and when the Report of Law Commission in the matter is received, the same would be examined by the Government with the various stakeholders involved in the matter.
Before the Supreme Court, six PILs were filled, four by Ashwini Upadhyay, one petition filed by Lubna Qureshi and another petition filed by Doris Martin, seek enactment of UCC.
As per the petitioners, UCC has always been seen as a spectacle of religious appeasement, and while the Supreme Court or High Court cannot ask the Government to implement Article 44 of the Constitution but can direct the Centre to constitute a committee to prepare a draft of Uniform Civil Code.
The court observed that similar pleas seeking UCC are also pending before the Delhi High Court. An affidavit has been filled by the Centre before the High Court earlier this year, claiming that implementation of the Uniform Civil Code, a directive principle under the Constitution, the same is a matter of public policy and that no direction in this regard can be issued by the Court.
The post Union Law Minister Tells Supreme Court: PIL For Uniform Civil Code Not Maintainable, No Direction Can Be Made To Parliament To Frame UCC appeared first on The Daily Guardian.
