Bombay High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Religious Reservation In State Wakf Board For Post Of Legal Assistant
The Bombay High Court issued notice to the Union of India, the State Government and the Wakf Board in a petition challenging religion-based reservation for appointment as a Legal Assistant of Maharashtra State Board of Waqfs.
A Division Bench of Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Y. G. Khobragade has by an interim order directed that the selection for the post will be subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition until further orders.
Senior Advocate Sanjeev Deshpande along with Advocate Swapnil Joshi appeared on behalf of the Petitioner while DSG A.G. Talhar appeared for the Union, Advocate A.V. Deshmukh for the State and Advocate N.E. Deshmukh for another Respondent.
In the Writ Petition, the Petitioner had challenged clauses 3.6 (b) and (c) of an advertisement issued by the Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Aurangabad, vide which persons who profess the Mohammedan Religion are alone held to be eligible for applying for the sixty posts that have been advertised.
“That, the Petitioner states that, further eligibility criteria is completely violative of basic structure of the Constitution of India and belligerent to the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, i.e. Clause 3.6. (b) “The Applicant Shall be Muslim.” Furthermore, Clause 3.6 (c) “The Applicant shall possess knowledge of Urdu (writing, reading and speaking).” Both the clauses are excruciating and denying an opportunity to the petitioner, despite of the fact that, he is otherwise eligible to apply for the said post”, the petition read.
The Petitioner's arguments against the impugned advertisement are that the advertisement does not align with the Maharashtra Civil Services Rules and established legal principles, the reservation based on religion is deemed unconstitutional as it contradicts the principles of equality, non-discrimination, and secularism enshrined in the Indian Constitution, the requirement that candidates must belong to a specific religion lacks logic or rationale and that Clause 3.6 (b) providing reservation solely based on religion is unconstitutional, violating Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution.
The Petitioner has contended that "reservation solely based on religion is contrary to the principles of Social Justice. As stated above, the concept of social justice aims to protect those who are deprived and discriminated against within the society. Including within the said ambit an entire religion would be an antithesis to the concept of social justice and the ethos of the Constitution. It is humbly submitted that therefore reservation cannot be extended to any community on the sole basis of religion.”
The petitioner has further prayed that the advertisement was bad and should be quashed.
"Until further orders, the selection to the post of Legal Assistant shall be subject to the result of this Petition", the Court directed while issuing notice in the plea and ordering completion of pleadings in the case by September 29.
Cause Title: Amarsinh Dilip Sisodia v. The Union of India
Click here to read/download Order
