B L Saraf
The State Budget for the financial year 2013 – 14 has, among other things , proposed to contribute a sum of Rs 30,000 towards the marriage expenses of each BPL orphan girl. Finance Minister, Abdul Rahim Rather, however, admitted in his budget speech that this amount was too paltry to meet the actual marriage expenses of a girl . Nonetheless, the budgetary allocation should be seen as a good will gesture extended by the Government to the needy girls, explained the FM. His refrain was that this is yet another step taken by the government to empower the women of J&K . The move is wel come, only if it comes through hassle free and without a middleman’s cut – so endemic to all the state benevolence . One hopes it goes in the right direction and usual public scepticism and cynicism surrounding a government action is dispelled. The plight of the women in our State, as indeed in whole of the country, is pathetic on many counts. It is very bad in the rural areas . Various measures initiated to ameliorate their condition have failed to achieve the desired results . Most have ended as mere tokenism. There are number of reasons for it; main being the unwillingness on the part of male dominated society to change its mind set . The laws framed in this regard are so skewed that they have become almost un- implementable. In other situations laws are found wanting . In some cases the rules are twisted to become gender discriminatory . Number of such circumstances can be quoted. But for the sake of brevity the one discussed here should suffice.
The State Government framed J&K Reservation Rules 2005, where under , among other things, certain areas of the State are declared Backward and 20 % reservation of seats in the professional institutions and the Public employment has been made for the persons residing in those areas. Same would apply to the persons who live near the Line Of Actual Control ( LOC ). According to the Rule – 21 (111) of these Rules a person claiming benefit for being resident of backward area or area near the LOC must establish that he / she has resided in the area for a period of not less than 15 years before the date of application and is actually residing in the said area . However, a person may not be disentitled from claiming this benefit only on the ground that his / her father or person on whom she is dependent is living in a place which is not identified as backward area or area near the LOC on account of his employment business or other professional or vocational reasons.
The Government complicated the matter by issuing clarification, vide Order No GAD (Adm) 18 / 2006-1 Dated 27 02 2006, regarding issuance of Resident of Backward Area Certificate in respect of Female candidates. This has an effect of denying the benefits of the Reservation – under this category – to the females married to the men residing in the Backward Area. As per the Order the concerned authorities have been directed not to issue RBA certificates to those female candidates who do not possess eligibility in terms of Rule 21 of J & K Reservation Rules 2005 ;including the one relating to 15 years actual residence in the Backward Area. Females shall stand disentitled despite having been married to the residents of the Backward area.The clarification has been issued to ” save the object of such Reservation”. On the plain reading of the Order it can be said that the position of the government has been made so untenable at law that should any concerned person or a public spirited activist challenge its legality he is sure to succeed in his endeavour . It is a cruel joke on the females. If the Clarification is read literally then a female belonging to the non-backward area having married a male of Backward Area would never enjoy the benefits of reservation. Say, for instance , a female of 20 to 25 years old gets married to a male of same age in the Backward area , which is a normal thing to happen , she will have to wait for 15 year to derive the benefits of the RBA Rules . By then she would be past the age required either to get admission in a professional institution or employment in the State service. Surely, by adopting such an attitude the government has further disempowered a rural women.
It is elementary position of law of the land that as soon as a female of a different household and area gets married her residence merges with that of her husband; unless otherwise is expressly provided for. Therefore , her residential status relates back to that of her husband. That explains why even a Non – State subject female acquires a Permanent Resident Status of the J&K State, immediately after her marriage with a State – Subject male of our state. Apart from that , she gets registered as Voter in her husband’s constituency and her name is duly entered in the Ration Card of her husband and the in- laws. The G AD Order referred above has, undoubtedly, caused a great injustice to the majority of women folk in the State. If the government wants people to have faith in its intentions and not accuse it of tokenism it should undo the injustice to the females perpetrated on them, listen to the voices of affected and rescind the Order No 18 / 2006 – 1 of 27 02 2006, immediately .
(The author is former Pr District & Sessions Judge)
Follow our WhatsApp channel