Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 48383
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, J, SHAJI P.CHALY, J
CITIZEN'S ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRACY, EQUALITY, TRANQUILITY AND SECULARISM (CADETS IN SHORT) – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 14017 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C.RAJENDRAN, K.VIJAYAN
For the Respondents: SRI.KRISHNADAS P.NAIR, SRI. TEK CHAND
The National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992 permits assessment of minorities, but the determination regarding minority status cannot be shifted to the Central Government without due consideration of statutory powers.
Headnote:(A) National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992 - The Act provides for the protection and monitoring of minority interests - Petitioner seeks redetermination of minority status for Muslim and Christian communities in Kerala based on socio-economic progress and representation. (Paras 2, 35, 48)
(B) Constitutional Law - Secularism and equality principles under Articles 14, 15, 29, 30, and 46 - The court underscores that minority rights exist under the Constitution despite the lack of a specific definition of 'minority'. (Paras 8, 12, 42)
(C) Relief Claimed - Petitioner requested multiple writs of mandamus to assess the minority status and stop preferential treatment - Court held that the petition lacks merit as the Central Government has no power to act as proposed. (Paras 1, 35, 39)
(D)
Findings of Court:
The statutory framework under the Acts protects the minority status and their continued privileges; thus the relief sought by the petitioner is unsustainable. (Paras 38, 48) (E)
Issues: Whether the Central Government can redetermine minority status and whether preferential treatment can be rescinded. (Paras 37, 46) (F)
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the powers to determine minority status lie with the National Commission, and the existing safeguards for minorities remain constitutional and valid. (Paras 9, 49) (G)
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks re-evaluation of minority status. (Para 1 , 2 , 6) |
| 2. argument on historical minority definitions and political representation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. petitioner's lack of legal foundation questioned. (Para 8 , 35 , 37) |
| 4. commission's role in monitoring minority rights. (Para 9 , 22 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. constitutional protections for minorities discussed. (Para 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. clarification on minority status and socio-economic contexts. (Para 40 , 42 , 44) |
| 7. writ petition dismissed due to lack of case. (Para 46 , 49) |
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
This is a Public Interest Litigation filed by a registered Organisation registered under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 at the office of the District Registrar, Ernakulam. According to the petitioner, the aims and objects of the petitioner Organisation include fight against discrimination on the basis of religion, caste, sex etc. and for maintaining equality among the citizens and peace and tranquility in all fields of life and to uphold the principles of secularism.
2. The grievance highlighted by the petitioner is in regard to the minority status continued to the Muslim and Christian communities in the State of Kerala, since according to the petitioner, the members of such communities have grown up to such a level in the fields of socio- economic and education, and therefore, their status is to be redetermined. It is also submitted that the report of the Committee appointed by the State Government, namely Paloli Muhammed kutty Committee, is a falsely created one suppressing the facts and figures so as to give undue advantage to the Muslim Communities and as such, it cannot be acted upon.
3. It was the predominant submission that the original inhabitants of India were termed as Hindus, and later with the advent of the Arabs and Christian Missionaries, several citizens of this country got converted to Islam and Christianity. It is also the case that the British regime, as part of their strategy to perpetuate their rule, divided the inhabitants as Hindus, Muslims and Christians etc. According to the petitioner, neither the Constitution nor any other enactments have defined the term 'minority'. But, the Government of India introduced an enactment by name National Commission for Minorities Act , 1992 and even in the said Act, instead of defining minority, certain religious communities were included in the list of minorities.
4. The petitioner has also pointed out various facets of the Act, 1992 and also rely upon the judgments of the Apex Court inT.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka [2002 (8) SCC 481] and Bal Patil and another v. Union of India and others [AIR 2005 SCC 3172] to contend that minority rights are not defined anywhere in the Constitution. The petitioner has also raised a contention with respect to the political advantage secured by the members of the Muslim and Christian communities in the State of Kerala, and has further pointed out the names of the Chief Ministers of the State belonging to the minority communities to contend that the members of the Muslims and Christians in Kerala had enough representation in the Ministry and the assembly from 1957 onwards.
5. That apart, it is stated that the data provided by the petitioner shows that the Ministers and members of the Legislative assembly belonging to the aforesaid communities were in the integral part of the decision making process and were holding powerful, valuable, and substantial portfolios and were in the forefront of developmental activities. Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention of the petitioner is that it is crystal clear that at no point of time, they were subjected to any sort of discrimination and there is no chance of any apprehension on their part that the majority communities will dominate them. According to the petitioner, the minority communities have dominated the majority communities from the very inception of elected Governments in Kerala. That apart, it was
