A.S. Oka, J.

1. Notice for final disposal at the admission stage was issued on 12th March 2014. A very interesting issue is raised by the Petitioners. The contention of the Petitioners is that the State cannot compel any citizen to disclose his religion while submitting forms and/or declarations. The contention is that a citizen has a right to claim that he does not believe in the philosophy of any religion and therefore, he does not practice or profess any religion. The contention in short is that a citizen can always claim that he belongs to “No Religion”.

2. The Petitioners claim to be the members of a registered organization by the name “Full Gospel Church of God” which is stated to have more than 4,000 members. The Union of India and the State of Maharashtra are the Respondents. The case made out in the Petition is that the said organization does believe in the existence of Lord Jesus Christ, but does not believe in any religion much less Christianity. The contention of the Petitioners is that the said organization believes that the Lord Jesus Christ desired to have a kingdom of heaven and did not intend to form any religion. The contention of the Petitioners is that the holy bible is entirely silent about the religion.

3. The Petitioners claim that they made an Application to the State Government Printing Press for notifying the change of religion. They wanted a gazette notification to be issued recording that they are not the Christians but they belong to “No Religion”. The Applications were rejected by the Government Printing Press. That is the cause of action for filing the present Petition. The only substantive prayer in the Petition is Prayer Clause (A), which reads thus:

“(A) That this Honorable Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction thereby directing the respondents to recognize “No Religion” as a form of religion and not to insist on writing/mentioning/specifying/quoting religion in any of its forms or declarations”.

4. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners is based on the Article 25 of the Constitution of India. His submission is that the State cannot compel any citizen to disclose his religion inasmuch as there is a freedom conferred by the Constitution on every citizen to claim that he does not practice or profess any religion. He has placed reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Ratilal Panachand Gandhi and others v. State of Bombay and others (AIR 1954 SC 388) and S.P. Mittal v. Union of India and others (AIR 1983 SC 1). He pointed out that various authorities of the State require the citizens and even students to fill up various forms for various purposes. He submitted that against the column of religion, a citizen who is filling up the form has a right to state that he belongs to “No Religion”.

5. The learned AGP representing the Government of Maharashtra and the learned counsel representing the Union of India invited the attention of the Court to Prayer Clause (A). Their submission is that “No Religion” cannot be treated as a religion or a form of religion. Their submission is that a Prayer Clause (A) as framed can never be granted.

6. We have given careful consideration to the submissions. It will be necessary to make a reference to the Article 25 of the Constitution of India, which reads thus:

“25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.-

(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law –

(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

(b) providing for social welfare and refo