Back
1997 Supreme(Mad) 1505
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUBRAMANI
Bala Seva Educational and Charitable Trust, represented by its Chairman and Managing Trustee, R. Sethuraman
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu & Another
W.P. No. 12672 of 1997 & W.M.P. Nos. 20394, 20395 of 1997
Decided On :Decided On : 17-12-1997
For the Petitioner:Mohan Parasaran, Advocate.
For the Respondents: S. Manikumar, Additional Government Pleader.
Sanskrit language is not a dead language and it continues to be used in various fields such as education, media, and literature.
Headnote:
MINORITY INSTITUTION - SANSKRIT LANGUAGE - STATUS - Whether Sanskrit language has ceased to be in use and therefore, the petitioner's application for minority status cannot be considered.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Shanmuga College of Engineering, applied for minority status as a linguistic minority institution on the ground that all the trustees were versed in Sanskrit and were committed to establishing Sanskrit as an important means of communication. The application was rejected by the 1st respondent on the ground that Sanskrit language has ceased to be in use.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's application was not sustainable. The court found that Sanskrit language is not a dead language and that it continues to be used in various fields such as education, media, and literature. The court also noted that the Government of India has taken a policy for implementing Sanskrit and propagation.
Issues: Whether Sanskrit language has ceased to be in use and therefore, the petitioner's application for minority status cannot be considered.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the report of the Sanskrit Commission 1956-57, which found that Sanskrit language is not confined to a particular community and that it is used by people from all walks of life. The court also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Santosh Kumar and others v. Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development and another, which held that Sanskrit language is a mother of all Indo-Aryan Languages and it is this language in which our vedas, puranas and Upanishads have been written and in which Kalidas, Bhavbuti, Banabhatta, and Dandi wrote their classics.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondents to reconsider the entire matter and pass final orders on the petitioner's application within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
1. Petitioner seeks issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records comprised in the proceedings of the 1st respondents Lr.No.l3655/Jl/97-4, dated 13.8.1997, and quash the same in so far as it relates to petitioner-Shanmuga College of Engineering is concerned, and consequently direct the respondents to accord minority status to the petitioner institution.
2. The petitioner applied to the 1st respondents on 25.6.1997, seeking minority status, viz., as a linguistic minority institution as all the trustees were all versed in Sanskrit and were committed to the cause of establishing Sanskrit as an important means of communication and in view of its intrinsic capability of being adopted to the modern technology. The petitioner also attached a copy of the certificate issued by the Revenue Divisional officer, Thanjavur, certifying that the petitioner Trust has established the Shanmuga College of Engineering at Thirumalai Samudram,Thanjavur Taluk, for the benefit and upliftment of Sanskrit speaking community in Tamil Nadu, It is also said that the other statutory requirements are also satisfied.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that when it was expecting a favourable order from the 1st respondent, on 13.8.1997, it was informed by the impugned letter that the claim is rejected, on the ground that the Sanskrit language has ceased to be in use. The petitioner challenges the validity of the impugned order on various grounds.
4. It is said that even now the All India Radio as well as Television broadcast the news in Sanskrit. Presidential awards are conferred to Sanskrit scholar. Even cinematographic films are produced in Sanskrit. It is further found that the most ideal language for use in computers is Sanskrit. It is said that even judicial decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court are relying on Bhagavad Gita, which is in Sanskrit language only and not on a judicial precedent. It is said that Indian culture, philosophy and behavioral setting the tenor in constitution, are all based on Sanskrit language, and the 1st respondent is ignorant of the various decisions of the Supreme Court, how it has given great encomium to Sanskrit language. It is said that the reasons stated in the impugned order that the language has ceased to be in use is nothing but an ignorant of what is happening around the world, and a refusal to recognise the reality. It is also said the respondents might be biased towards the language, and the reasons referred to in the impugned Order are not legally supported the petitioner states that the impugned order is liable to be quashed, and necessary direction must be given to recognise the petitioner institution as a minority institution.
5. A detailed counter-affidavit has been filed, supporting the impugned order. It is said that the petitioner has not established that the institution has been brought into being by a minority community, and the petitioner has not proved that the members of the Trust of the Institution from its inception belong to a minority community whose mother tongue is Sanskrit. It is also said that having knowledge of Sanskrit will not make a person of a minority community, and therefore, the impugned order is correct.
6. After having heard both the counsel, I feel that the impugned order cannot stand for a moment.
7. The only reason stated in the impugned order, rejecting the petitioners application, reads thus:
8. According to the 1st respondent, Sanskrit language has ceased to be in use, and therefore, the petitioners application do not require consideration. The said reasoning is nothing but ignorance of reality. Counsel for the petitioner brought to my notice the report of the Sanskrit Commission 1956- 57. paragraph 96 of the Report is relevant for our consideration, which reads thus:
“96. In the course of our tours in South India, we interviewed several non-Brahmaihs in high posi-tion and active in public life, business, etc., and we found them all favourable to
