news details |
|
|
| Moves once again afoot to humiliate Daughters of J&K | | Disqualification BILL - III | | RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Mar 11: Prof Hari Om of Jammu University approached the High Court to seek justice for the daughters of the state. In the case Hari Om VS State of J&K and others (PIL. No. 1002/2004 & CMP No. 1089/2004), the Double Bench comprising Justice VK Jhanji and Justice YP Nargotra gave the following judgment: "In the meantime, respondents (State of J&K & others) are directed not to make any endorsement of 'valid till marriage' on the State Subject Certificate issued to unmarried daughters of State Subjects". The Double Bench gave the interim judgment on September 24, 2004, which was widely published in the local and national dailies.
Believe it or not, but it is a fact that the anti-daughters' elements in the State Government did not implement the interim order. They dismissed the judgment with contempt. As a matter of fact, on January 27, 2005, Commissioner/Secretary to the Government, Revenue Department, issued a circular No Rev (LB) 87/74 asking the State Subject Certificate issuing authorities to make endorsement to the effect: "The certificate may be reissued after marriage to indicate if the lady has married a State Subject or non-State Subject".
Perturbed, Prof Hari Om again knocked at doors of the High Court and sought contempt proceedings against the J&K Government. In fact, he filed another PIL (COA (PIL) No. 2/2005). The matter went to the Double Bench comprising Justice VK Jhanji and Justice Parmod Kohli. It was on July 11, 2005 that the Bench stayed the implementation of the anti-women circular under question and issued a notice to the J&K Government. This notice had its impact on the J&K Government. The reasons were obvious. On August 2, 2005, it withdrew the Circular vide No. Rev/PRC/04-WP. And, on August 8, 2005, Justice VK Jhanji and Justice YP Nargotra passed their judgment and it was: "In view of circular dated 2nd of August, 2005, passed by respondents (read J&K Government), the grievance of the petitioner (read Prof Hari Om) stands redressed and, therefore, this Public Interest Litigation as well as the contempt petition are disposed of having been rendered in-fructuous. Rule, if any, issued is discharged".
That means the J&K High Court not once but on four occasions delivered judgments all aimed at ensuring gender equality. The judgments were unambiguous and were hailed by one and all, barring the reactionary, fundamentalist, backward-looking and anti-women elements in the Valley and their opportunist supporters in Jammu province.
It was expected that these landmark judicial pronouncements would settle the women issue once for all and that the reactionary elements would refrain from doing anything that tramples upon the natural rights of the daughters of the state. Unfortunately, it has not happened. The fundamentalist and militant-friendly parties like the People's Democratic Party have again started conspiring against the female State Subjects. The Permanent Resident (Disqualification) Bill (Legislative Council Private Member's Bill No. 4), which was moved by Murtaza Khan in the Legislative Council on Monday, needs to be viewed in this context. It is ill-designed and ill-conceived and, if adopted, would enslave the female State Subjects. It is not only designed to snatch the citizenship rights of daughters of J&K marrying outside the state, but also to snatch the same rights of non-State Subject females marrying permanent residents of J&K after termination of the marriages for whatever reasons.
The government should not have allowed Murtaza Khan to introduce the draconian Bill taking into consideration the storm the similar official Bill had created across the country in 2004. That Revenue Minister Raman Bhalla did not oppose this BLACK BILL and allowed Murtaza Khan to go ahead does show that insidious influence is at work to negate the High Court judgments and deprive the female State Subjects of their fundamental rights if they would marry non-State Subjects. It appears the anti-women forces have entered into an unholy alliance to disgrace and harm women of the state and jeopardize their legitimate rights and interests.
How else should one interpret the action on the part of the Revenue Minister, who belongs to the Congress and who in 2004 had opposed the Permanent Resident (Disqualification) Bill? His action has undoubtedly outraged the sentiments of female State Subjects and all those who believe in gender equality. And, he did so on the day when the Congress-led UPA Government introduced a historic Bill in the Rajya Sabha seeking 33 per cent reservation for women in the Parliament and the State Assemblies.
The Congress needs to review its stand on the crucial issue of gender equality. It should tell its coalition partner, National Conference, in unequivocal terms that it will not tolerate any onslaught on the female State Subjects and that it would withdraw support to the government if it makes common cause with the People's Democratic Party. There are reasons to believe that the National Conference and the CPI-M legislators would give their unflinching support to the anti-women Bill. After all, the National Conference and the CPI-M legislators had in 2004 extended their unqualified support to the controversial Permanent Resident (Disqualification) Bill. (Concluded)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
