news details |
|
|
| PRC to children of female State-Subjects married outside JK | | HC issues notice to State of J&K | | early times report
Jammu, Oct 21 (JNF): In a petition challenging the constitution of J&K State regarding the PRC to the children of daughters of State who married with non-state subject males, Justice Tashi Rabstan of J&K High Court Jammu Wing after hearing Sr. Adv Sunil Sethi issued notice to Chief Secretary J&K, Secretary Law Justice & Parliamentary Affairs and Commissioner/secretary Revenue returnable within four weeks.
In a petition filed by Dr. Parbhjit Kour Modi in which very important question of law was raised "whether it is legally permissible to make classification between offspring of male non-permanent residents of State of J&K vis-à-vis Female Permanent Residents of J&K State.
In the petition the petitioner seeking to declare section 6 of constitution of J&K as ultra vires to the effect that it restricts the right to PRC of J&K to the offspring of Male State Subject Holders and denies such rights to offspring of Female State Subject holders who marry a non-state subject.
Justice Tashi Rabstan observed that when the matter came up for consideration Sr. Adv Sunil Sethi appearing for the petitioner stated at bar that though the offspring of male state-subject and female non-state subject are entitled to the benefits/privileges arising out of Article 370 of the constitution of India, but the offspring of male non-state subject and female state subject are being denied such rights and they are being considered aliens in the land of their birth.
Counsel for the petitioner contended that section 6 of constitution of J&K denied the petitioner the rights to protection from state subject to degrading treatment and not to be discriminated against on the basis of her sex. She cannot be allowed to suffer from adverse consequences of the relevant clauses of the section 6 of constitution of J&K, only because she is a woman. It is further contention that it would be offensive to modern thinking and spirit of Constitution was framed deliberately to permit discrimination on the grounds of sex.
It is further submitted that grant of PRC Act 1963 is not the common law but an act of state legislature. By its provisions it can adversely affect the daily lives of women who marry non-state subjects.
While arguing the case Sr. Adv Sunil Sethi further contended that section 6 of the Constitution of J&K is violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India, since it creates un-equality between a male and a female state subject holder.
He further submitted that not only this, Section 6 is also violative of Article 15 of constitution of India, which guarantees that nobody should be discriminated against on the basis of his/her sex in enforcement of fundamental rights and said that the petition involves important question of law and the matter be referred to Chief Justice for constituting a larger bench for resolving this petition.
Upon this Justice Tashi Rabstan considered the submission of Sr. Adv Sunil Sethi for the petitioner and also gone through the question of law formulated observed that it would be appropriate to put the state to notice and know its stance before considering submissions made by the petitioner will regard to reference of question framed to the larger bench and issued noticed to Chief Secretary J&K, Secretary Law Justice & Parliamentary Affairs and Commissioner/secretary Revenue returnable within four weeks and steps within one week.
Justice Tashi Rabstan further observed that in view of the controversy raised in the petition, notice shall also go to advocate General for his assistance in the matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
