Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M. Lodha, CJI., Dipak Misra, Madan B. Lokur, Kurian Joseph, S.A. Bobde, JJ.
U.P. Hindi Sahitya Sammelan – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NO.459 OF 1997
Decided On : 04-09-2014
(1975) 2 SCC 671 – Distinguished
(b) Constitution of India – Article 345 – Separate mention of Hindi – To promote and spread Hindi in terms of Article 351 – State legislature can adopt any number of languages for all or any of the official purposes of the State – No requirement of any demand on the State Government – Use of ‘may’ – Discretion to state – Articles 343(1), 344(2)(a), 345, 346 proviso, 348(2) and 351 – Notwithstanding special status of Hindi, State is not precluded from adopting multiple official languages. (Para 31, 32, 33, 38)
(c) Constitution of India – Article 345 – Expression “subject to the provisions of Articles 346 and 347” – Does not make Article 345 subordinate to Articles 346 and 347 – Only requires compliance with any direction issued by President under Article 347 – State cannot adopt multiple languages in conflict with directions issued by the President under Article 347. (Para 34)
(d) Interpretation of Constitution – Articles 345 and 347 – Articles 345 and 347 should be construed so as to make it consistent with federal structure. (Para 34)
(e) Constitution of India – Articles 345 and 347 – Official languages – Two routes – By State legislature under Article 345 and by Presidential direction under Article 347 – Both are complementary – Wrong to contend that Presidential direction is the only way to adopt any other language than Hindi – State legislature is not precluded from adopting a language on demand – Constitution of India – Article 350. (Para 39, 40, 41)
Facts of the case:
Validity of the Uttar Pradesh Official Language (Amendment) Act, 1989 was challenged by the appellants before the High Court which dismissed the same holding the enactment to be valid and constitutional.
Finding of the Court:
In the absence of direction issued by the President under Article 347 of the Constitution, there is no restriction, restraint or impediment for the State Legislature in adopting one of the languages in use in the State as an official language under Article 345 of the Constitution of India.
JUDGMENT
R.M. LODHA, CJI.
On 12.11.1951, the Uttar Pradesh Official Language Act, 1951 (U.P. Act No.XXVI of 1951) (for short, ‘1951 Act’) was published in Gazette Extraordinary and came into force. 1951 Act was passed in Hindi by the U.P. Legislative Assembly on 27.09.1951 and by the U.P Legislative Council on 29.09.1951. It received the assent of the Governor on 05.11.1951. 1951 Act is enacted by the State Legislature to provide for adoption of Hindi as the language to be used for the official purposes and other matters of the State of Uttar Pradesh.
2. Section 2 of the 1951 Act reads as under:
2. Hindi to be official language of the State.—Without prejudice to the provisions of Articles 346 and 347 of the Constitution, Hindi in Devnagri script shall, with effect from such date, as the State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, appoint in this behalf, be the language used in respect of the following :—
(a) (i) ordinances promulgated under Article 213 of the Constitution.
(ii) orders, rules regulations and bye-laws issued by the State Government under the Constitution of India or under any law made by Parliament or the Legislature of the State, and
(b) all or any of the official purposes of the State; and different dates may be appointed for different purposes in clauses (a) and (b) aforesaid.
A proviso was inserted to above Section 2 by U.P. Act No.9 of 1969. It reads, “Provided that the State Government may by general or special order, in this behalf, permit the use of the international form of Indian numerals for any official purpose of the State.”
3. On 07.04.1982, an Ordinance called the Uttar Pradesh Official Language (Amendment) Ordinance, 1982 was promulgated by the Governor. Section 2 of the Ordinance provided that in the 1951 Act, after Section 2, the following Section (deemed Section 3) shall be inserted:
In the interest of Urdu speaking people, Urdu language shall be used as second language, in addition to Hindi for such purposes as are specified in the Schedule.
Section 3 of the Ordinance provided that in the Principal Act, after Section 3, as inserted by the Ordinance, the following Schedule shall be inserted:
1. Entertaining application in Urdu presented by the members of the public.
2. Receiving documents in Urdu presented for registration with a Hindi copy thereof.
3. Publication of important Government Rules, Regulation and Notifications.
4. Publication of important Government Advertisements.
5. Translation of Gazette in Urdu.
4. The above Ordinance was replaced by the U.P. Official Language (Amendment) (3rd) Ordinance, 1983 (U.P. Ordinance 44 of 1983). The constitutionality of U.P. Ordinance No.44 of 1983 was put in issue before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench in Writ Petition No.285 of 1984 by the present appellant U.P. Hindi Sahitya Sammelan. This writ petition was dismissed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, though by separate judgments.
5. On 07.10.1989, the Uttar Pradesh Official Language (Amendment) Act, 1989 (U.P. Act No.28 of 1989) (for short, “1989 Amendment Act”) came into effect. 1989 Amendment Act was enacted by the U.P. Legislature to amend 1951 Act. By this Amendment Act, Section 3 was inserted after Section 2 in 1951 Act providing for Urdu language as second official language for such purposes as may be notified by the State Government from time to time.
6. In pursuance of the power conferred upon the State Government to notify Urdu as second official language for specified purposes, the State Government issued a notification on 07.10.1989 notifying use of Urdu language as second official language for the following seven purposes:
1. Entertaining petitions and applications in Urdu and replies thereof in Urdu,
2. receiving documents written in Urdu by the Registration office,
3. publication of important Government Rules, Regulations and Notifications in Urdu also,
4. issuing Government orders and circulars of public importance in Urdu also,
5. publicat
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
