Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
(DIVISION BENCH)
Sheel Nagu and Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, JJ.
Rumman Uddin v. State of M. P. & Others
Writ Petition No. 2313 of 2020 (PIL) (Gwalior);
Decided on 19.5.2020
(1) Constitution of India -- Preamble -- interpretation -- should be interpreted as part of Constitution -- greater cognizance of Preamble should be taken as setting forth goals of our political society -- may be invoked to determine ambit of fundamental rights and directive principles -- in matter of interpretation of provisions of Constitution as well as a statute, whenever constitutionality of any statute is challenged, Court should rely on objects embodied in Preamble to Constitution -- generous and purposive construction of Constitution is the basic object of Preamble. [Paras 9 & 10]
(2) Interpretation of Statutes -- Constitution of India -- purposive approach rather than strict literal approach to interpretation should be adopted -- Constitutional provision must be construed not in narrow and restricted sense, but in wide and liberal sense. [Para 10]
(3) Constitution of India -- Chap. III -- fundamental rights -- are heart and soul of Constitution -- are those rights of citizens or those negative obligations of State which do not permit encroachment on individual liberties -- but -- these provisions are not absolute in nature -- reasonable restrictions can be imposed on fundamental rights -- interpretation of Constitution has to be such as to enable citizens to enjoy rights guaranteed by Part III in fullest measure -- fundamental rights are no longer interpreted as isolated protections which directly arise, but collectively form a comprehensive test against the arbitrary exercise of State power in any area -- fundamental rights and directive principles have to be balanced. [Paras 12 & 15]
(4) Constitution of India -- Arts. 226, 21A and 350A -- public interest litigation -- induction of Urdu language as subject in school education -- provision under Art. 350A, incorporated in 'Special Directives', is only to safeguard interest of linguistic minority after reorganization of State -- cannot be used to make it mandate, to incorporate any specific language in any specific syllabus -- specific posts of teacher for Urdu language sanctioned by Lok Shikshan Sanchalnalaya -- sufficient endeavours already made by Government with regard to Art. 350A -- mandate and spirit of Art. 350A is taken of -- petition neithere contain bonafide cause, nor is as per object of constitution dismissed. W.P. 17704 of 2018 decided. on 26.2.2020 relied on. [Paras 19, 21 & 22]
¼1½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & mn~nsf'kdk & fuoZpu & lafo/kku ds va'k ds :i esa fuoZpu fd;k tkuk pkfg, & gekjs jktuhfrd lekt ds y{; fu/kkZfjr djus okyh gksus ds :i esa mn~nsf'kdk dk vkSj vf/kd laKku fd;k tkuk pkfg, & ewy vf/kdkjksa vkSj funs'kd rRoksa dh O;kfIr vo/kkfjr djus ds fy, vkJ; fy;k tk ldrk gS & lafo/kku ds mica/kksa ds lkFk gh dkuwu ds fuoZpu ds fo"k; esa] tc dHkh fdlh dkuwu dh lkafo/kkfudrk vkf{kIr gks] U;k;ky; dks lafo/kku dh mn~nsf'kdk esa lfUufgr mn~ns';ksa dk voyac ysuk pfkg, & lafo/kku dk mnkj vkSj Á;kstuiw.kZ vFkkZUo;u mn~nsf'kdk dk ewy mn~ns'; gSA ¼iSjk 9 ,oa 10½
¼2½ fof/k dk fuoZpu & Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & fuoZpu ds Áfr vfrfu;efu"B 'kkfCnd #[k ds ctk; Á;kstuiw.kZ #[k viuk;k tkuk pkfg, & lkafo/kkfud mica/kksa dk vFkkZUo;u ladh.kZ vkSj lhfer vFkZ esa ugha] vfirq foLr`r vkSj mnkj vFkZ esa fd;k tkuk pkfg,A ¼iSjk 10½
¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & v/;k; 3 & ewy vf/kdkj & lafo/kku dk eeZ gSa & ukxfjdksa ds og vf/kdkj vFkok jkT; dh og _.kkRed ck/;rk,a gSa tks O;fDrxr Lora=rkvksa dk vfrØe.k vuqKkr ugha djrha & ijarq & ;g micaèk vkR;afrd ÁÑfr ds ugha gSa & ewy vf/kdkjksa ij ;qfDr;qDr fucZ/ku vf/kjksfir fd, tk ldrs gSaa & lafo/kku dk fuoZpu ,slk gksuk vko';d gS ftlls ukxfjdrk Hkkx 3 }kjk ÁR;kHkwr vf/kdkj dk iw.kZ miHkksx dj lds & ewy vf/kdkjksa dk fuoZpu vc lh/ks mn~Hkwr gksus okys ,dkdh laj{k.kksa ds :i esa ugha fd;k tkrk] cfYd og lkewfgd :i ls fdlh Hkh {ks= esa jkT; dh 'kfDr ds euekus Á;ksx ds fo#) fo'kn ijh{k.k xfBr djrs gSa & ewy vf/kdkj vkSj funs'kd rRoksa esa larqyu j[kk tkuk gksrk gSA ¼iSjk 12 ,oa 15½
¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuqPNsn 226] 21d rFkk 350d & yksdfgr eqdnek & fo|ky;hu f'k{kk esa fo"k; ds :i esa mnwZ Hkk"kk lekos'k & ^fo'ks"k funs'k* esa lekfgr vuqPNsn 350 ds v/khu mica/k dsoy jkT; ds iquxZBu ds i'pkr~ Hkk"kkbZ vYila[;dksa dk fgr lqjf{kr djus ds fy, & bldk mi;ksx fdlh fofufnZ"V ikB~; fooj.k esa dksbZ fofufnZ"V Hkk"kk lekfgr djuk vkKkid cukus ds fy, ugha fd;k tk ldrk & mnwZ Hkk"kk ds f'k{kdksa ds fofufnZ"V in yksd f'k{k.k lapkyuky; }kjk eatwj & vuqPNsn 350d ds laca/k esa ljdkj }kjk i;kZIr Á;Ru igys gh fd, x, & vuqPNsn 350d dh vkKk vkSj Hkkouk dk /;ku j[kk x;k & ;kfpdk esa u rks ln~Hkkfod fgr varfoZ"V] u ;g lafo/kku ds mn~ns'; ds vuqlkj gh & [kkfjtA ;kfpdk Øekad 17704 lu~ 2018 fu.khZr fnukad 26-2-2020 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 19] 21 ,oa 22½
ORDER
Shrivastava, J. -- 1. Petitioner claiming probono publico cause has submitted before this Court that the present matter is arising out of inaction on the part of the respondents, whereby the respondents are not ensuring induction of Urdu language as subject in school education despite millions of Indians are speaking Urdu and Urdu is officially recognised as regional language of India.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that State of Rajasthan has introduced Urdu language in three schools. Most of the Urdu medium Government schools are only functional on papers. The overall scenario reflects that the language which has been able to secure its place in language in Constitution has failed to secure its place in elementary education. The petitioner has carried out various activities for upliftment of down-trodden class. The petitioner served for social awareness from time to time and has also volunteered in cleanliness of Kanthan River in Sironj area and has also performed appreciable role in ‘Shahar Sarkar Dwar Programme’ organized by Nagar Palika Parishad, Sironj and in various other social programmes.
3. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Constitution of India has included a clause to protect minority languages as a fundamental right. It states “any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.” It is further submitted that the language policy of India provides guarantee to protect the linguistic minorities.
4. The petitioner by way of this petition in the nature of probono publico has sought for following reliefs :-
(i) Respondents may kindly be directed to make Urdu a compulsory subject in all schools upto Class XII.
(ii) Respondents be further directed to create posts in schools for appointment of teachers for teaching Urdu subject.
(iii) Any other direction which this Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.”
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the submissions.
6. Article 350A has been inserted by Constitution (7th Amendment) Act, 1956 in Chapter IV of the Constitution, wherein ‘Special Directives’ were incorporated. This Article is designed to implement one of the recommendations of the Reorganisation Commission, to safeguard the interests of linguistic minorities after the reorganisation of States. That means, this Article is incorporated in Special Directives in Chapter IV of the Constitution with intention to safeguard the interests of linguistic minorities after reorganisation of the States.
7. The Preamble of Indian Constitution is reiterated as under for ready reference :-
“WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens :
JUSTICE, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THE CONSTITUTION.” .
8. The Preamble starts with WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic. That means, Preamble is the source of Constitution, to secure to all it citizens Justice, social, economic and political; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and of opportunity; it shows the ideals and aspirations of the Preamble and the objects which the Constitution-makers intended to be realised by its enacting provisions and “to promote among them all Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation.”
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
