A PIL has been filed by Devkinandan Thakur in the Supreme Court seeking an order for the purpose of identification for minorities at the district level to grant accordingly the benefits under Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India.
What is the PIL about?
The notification issued by the Central Government in 1993 declared that Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Parsi and Jain as minorities at the national level. The Ministry of Welfare of the Government of India issued the notification on 23rd October 1993, that the five religions mentioned are “minority communities” under the provision of Sec. 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act 1992.
The petition filed on 04th June 2022 claims that the notification of 1993 is arbitrarily irrational and contrary to the Articles 14,15,21, 29 and 30 of the Indian Constitution. It also raised the question of the validity of Sec. 2(c) of the National Commission for Minorities Act 1992.
The petition claimed that Hindus are comparatively less in number in some states and regions, but they are not provided with the benefits and protections of the minorities. It claimed the population of the Hindus in such a manner:
On the other hand, the petitioner also stated that some states, which has a larger Muslim and Buddhist population but are still enjoying the benefits and protection of the Minority Act.
What does the petition seek from the Supreme Court of India?
The petitioner seeks a discretionary order instructing the Union Government to define ‘minority’ and lay down the guidelines for the identification of minorities at the district level, to provide protection to such religious and linguistic groups that are socially, economically, politically non-dominant, and inferior numerically for the benefits and protections under the provisions under Articles 29 and 30.
Though a similar PIL was filed in the Supreme Court by Ashwini Upadhyay filed on 28th March 2022, claiming for the Hindus in those states, where are inferior in number. The states have the power to notify the minorities, the claim of the petitioners that ‘real minorities’ are different in different states, was supported by the Centre.
Leave a Reply