Shiban Khaibri
Muslim community, as a minority at the national level and getting the benefits as a minority cannot, again, get such benefits at the state levels in Jammu and Kashmir where they are the dominating and the majority community was discussed in these columns by this writer on November 16 last year. Likewise, in few other states where Hindus were in minority like Punjab, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur , Nagaland, Lakshwadeep, Mizoram and Meghalaya, there was a strong case based on humanitarian, ethical, moral and constitutional grounds about setting up of a Minority Commission in all these states which should be the first priority of the Government since all these years, successive Governments at the centre had taken no initiative to take up the case vigorously with such states in this regard. Hindus in the state were not benefitted by the welfare schemes of the state as well as the Central Governments and such benefits were being given to Muslims who otherwise were benefitted under the category “minority” in the overall National perspective.
It may well be noted that denying the rights of a minority on religious and linguistic basis was tantamount to violation of Article 29 and Article 30 (Protection and rights) of the constitution , in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. PILs were filed in the Supreme Court of India. A landmark development, virtually salvaging the position was noticed when the intentions of the Central Government through its attorney General K .K. Venugopal were made known that , in principle, the Jammu and Kashmir State Government had agreed to set up a minority commission. Accordingly, the Attorney General submitted the minutes of a joint meeting of the centre and Jammu and Kashmir officials held on the direction of the Supreme Court to a bench headed by Chief Justice Deepak Mishra. The minutes, inter alia said, “The State Government of Jammu and Kashmir has, in principle, given indication that the State Government will consider and examine the feasibility of setting up State Minority Commission at the relevant point of time as and when based upon the critical study of the social and educational backwardness of the “minorities” across various regions of the state.”was made.
It has further been stated that considering special needs of the minorities as are residing in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, a special project known as “Chief Minister’s inclusive development initiative” is being formulated by the State Government. The said project will have focused development efforts for certain special segments of the society and will include upgrading civic infrastructure such as health, education, water etc, scholarship scheme for students not covered under schemes of minority affairs so as to take care of the difficulties of special segments of the population including minorities residing in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The above mentioned “assurances” were taken into consideration by the Bench under Chief Justice Deepak Mishra which also comprised Justices A. M. Khanwilkar and D .Y. Chandrachud . The Bench disposed off a PIL in this regard which was filed by lawyer Ankur Sharma, son of the soil. The bench appeared not inclined to go any farther than “what is stated in the minutes of the meeting is looked into and considered by the State Government.”
However, the Bench refused to issue any orders to the State Government to set up a commission as it observed, “No, we cannot say set up a commission, we do not have the jurisdiction, we also cannot issue a mandamus directing extension of National Commission of Minority Act to Jammu and Kashmir, we cannot ask the state to enact a particular law.”
It is noteworthy and as mentioned in my previous article, Muslim population was nearly 69% in the state followed by 28% Hindus, 1.9% Sikhs, Buddhists and Christians being 0.9 and 0.3% respectively. The valley comprised 97% Muslims, 2.45% Hindus followed by Sikhs and others as 0.98% and 0.17% respectively. Any section of the society cannot logically be beneficiary twice under the same category, ie; at the national level ratings even while living and staying in the state as also at the state level ratings. In other words, the yardstick to determine any section as a minority whether linguistic or religious depended upon its comparative numbers or the population figures to total population. Rights of religious and linguistic minorities in the state have been siphoned off illegally and arbitrarily only because of extension of benefits to “unqualified sections” of the population. The Apex Court was approached with this main plea or the kernel of the entire issue.
Now the ball is in the court of the state. Neither the centre nor the State Governments had so far notified Hindus as minority under section 2(c) of the National Commission of Minority Act thus depriving Hindus of their constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 25 to 30 .National Commission of Minorities Act 1992 extends to the whole of India excepting the state of Jammu and Kashmir because of the operation of Article 370 of the Constitution. The Central Governments that have been in power so far have never made a notification itself nor impressed upon the State Government to have the office of the National Commission for Minorities opened in this state to function, monitor, recommend, suggest, supervise and ensure benefits provided to Hindus of this state as enshrined to be guaranteed in the constitution of India.
All eyes are, now, focused on the State Government as to how much and how fast it was going to break the ice. It is ebulliently in the air that the State Government has, in principle, given indication that it will consider the need and examine the feasibility of setting up of a State Minority Commission at the “relevant point of time”. This “Relevant point of time” is somewhat vague and ambiguous as also engulfed by mist of uncertainty. Besides, it is, again, manifestation of the writ large of the same mindset and approach towards this issue which was there before the directions and observations of the Apex Court.
Any pre- conditions like “studying of the social and educational backwardness” and the like excepting meeting the standards of what constitutes a minority, shall be construed as tacitly postponing and deferring , if not rejecting the need to extend the operation of the Minority Commission in the state. Adopting an approach of reticence and keeping things wrapped in the suspense of “When” shall definitely send waves of discontentedness among the deprived sections of the minority in the state who feel robbed of their legitimate right to the benefits otherwise accruable to a religious / linguistic minority. Let the state not adopt a lackadaisical or an avoiding approach in this important matter.
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel