Gujarat High Court
Makvana Pratikkumar Biharilal vs Union Of India on 16 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8154 of 2024
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE -SD/-
======================================
Approved for Reporting No Yes
No
======================================
MAKVANA PRATIKKUMAR BIHARILAL & ANR.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
======================================
Appearance:
LOVE S MODI(8362) for the Petitioner Nos. 1,2
MR. M. D. RAHEVAR, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 3,4
MRS KRISHNA G RAWAL(1315) for the Respondent Nos. 1,2
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 16/01/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Rahevar, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4 - State and Mrs. Rawal, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2.
2. Present petitioners claims to be the beneficiaries of Page 1 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined scheme by contending that petitioner no.1 belongs to scheduled tribe/scheduled caste category and is married to petitioner no.2 who belongs to "other backward class (OBC)"
category. It is submitted that in case where a person belonging to scheduled caste married to non scheduled caste person, they shall be entitled to benefits under scheme called "Dr. Ambedkar Scheme for Social Integration through Inter- Caste Marriages".
2.1 The petitioners have therefore approached this Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Articles 14 & 21, challenging the communication dated 12 th December, 2023 passed by the Director, Dr. Ambedkar Foundation, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of Gujarat. By the said impugned communication, the proposal submitted by the petitioners seeking benefit under the aforesaid scheme has not been accepted in view of the guidelines prescribed under the Scheme. The only reason which is cited by the respondent no.2 authority is that the application has not been submitted in the office within one year of marriage.
3. It would be appropriate to examine the object with which the Scheme has been introduced. The Scheme was initially introduced on a pilot basis for a period of two years Page 2 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined i.e. in the year 2013-14 and 2014-15 and thereafter it has been continued as a regular scheme. The object of the scheme as can be gathered from the abstract of guidelines placed on record is to appreciate the socially bold step of inter-caste marriage by the newly married couple and to extend financial incentive to the couple to enable them to settle down in the initial phase of their marrige life. It further clarifies that the same should not be construed as a supplementary scheme to unemployment generation or poverty alleviation scheme. The abstract refers to the object no. XXXI in the memorandum of association of Dr. Ambedkar Foundation in its background which mandates "to organize special campaigns for removal of untouchability and caste based prejudices and for bringing in attitudinal change in the society through communal harmony and brotherhood and receive Government assistance for such purposes". Thus, in other words, the scheme enforces significant steps to reduce the caste-prejudices, abolish untouchability and spread the values of liberty, equality, fraternity etc. in the society. The aim seems to be to achieve constitutional values.
4. In light of the aforesaid guidelines, examining the narrow controversy involved in the present petition, the undisputed facts as can be noticed are that the petitioner no.1 belonging to the scheduled caste category has married with a Page 3 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined person belonging to non scheduled caste. Thus, it is a case of inter-caste marriage. One of the essential requirements of the eligibility criteria mentioned in the abstract of the guidelines of the aforesaid scheme suggest that the marriage should be followed as per the law and duly registered under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It further requires an affidavit of respective spouses to be filed declaring there being legal marriage and in matrimonial alliance. The petitioners got married on 27th February, 2020 as per the Hindu religion rites and rituals. The couple applied for registration of their marriage in view of the provision of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 immediately thereafter and certificate to that effect was issued by the competent authority on 2nd March, 2020. The couple thereafter applied on 23rd November, 2020 before the respondent no.2 as well as respondent no.3 authorities in terms of the scheme. The proposal was therefore duly submitted within a period of one year of their marriage. However, the Collector, Ahmedabad - respondent no.4 forwarded the said application to the respondent no.2 herein on 25th January, 2022. The respondent no.2 being Director of the Foundation by taking too technical a stand and on erroneous interpretation of the guidelines of the scheme, has not entertained the proposal as being not submitted within a period of one year from the date of the marriage. Page 4 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined
5. The responsible officer from the office of the respondent no.4 - District Collector, Ahmedabad has submitted on affidavit that the petitioners have submitted an application to the respondent no.4 on 23 rd November, 2020, which falls within the time frame. It is further submitted that upon receipt of such proposal the same was scrutinized inasmuch as necessary opinion was sought for from the office of Deputy Director, Social Welfare Department on 4th December, 2020 and thereby seeking verification of the caste of the petitioner no.1. It is submitted that due to COVID-19 pandemic, the Government Departments were working with 50% staff, therefore, the opinion was received in this regard on 2 nd July, 2021. Thereafter a necessary process was undertaken to forward the proposal to the respondent no.2 - Director of Dr. Ambedkar Foundation. Such proposal was forwarded with recommendation on 25th January, 2022. Thus, the responsible officer on affidavit has submitted that the time limit specified under the Scheme relates to the submission of proposal within one year by the petitioners and not with regard to proposal with recommendation. According to respondent no.4 no time limit has been prescribed for submission of recommendation by the competent authority viz. Collector is concerned. The affidavit further discloses the cases of similarly situated applicants cases being considered in the past. Lastly, the affidavit mentions that the scheme being beneficial legislation, Page 5 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined the respondent no.2 ought not to have taken such a technical stand and has therefore, supported the case of the petitioners. The respondent no.2 has not filed any counter to the aforesaid submission of the respondent no.4 authority.
6. On overall appreciation of the record and noticing a benevolent object, in my opinion, the authority ought not to have taken such a technical stand of delay as a ground for not accepting their application thereby refusing the incentive extended under the scheme. The whole object of the scheme seems to be to bring about sustainable social incarnation, harmony and fraternity amongst different castes of the society by extending incentives to inter-caste married couples is to enable them to settle down in the initial phase of their marriage life. The scheme can be treated as a beneficial statute which aims to confer benefit on individuals or class of persons by relieving them of onerous obligations under contracts entered into by them or which tend to protect persons against oppressive acts from individuals with whom they stand in certain relations. In such a class of beneficial statute, the well established principle in the construction of such statutes is that there should not be any narrow interpretation. The enforcing agencies should be generous towards the persons on whom benefit should be conferred. The rule of beneficial construction implies that to meet the Page 6 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined object, the attempt should be to interpret liberally to give the widest possible meaning to it. Beneficial construction is an interpretation to secure remedy to the victim who is unjustly denied relief. The interpretation of a statue should be done in such a way that mischief is suppressed and remedy is advanced.
7. Applying the aforesaid principles, the period prescribed for submission of proposal within one year of marriage cannot be construed as a strict provision in light of the benevolent object underlining the scheme. It clearly emerges on record that proposal was submitted by the petitioners on 23 rd November, 2020 to the respondent nos. 2 and 3 authorities immediately within one year of their marriage and the recommendation dated 25th January, 2022 was later on addressed by the District Collector office along with the proposal. Thus, the petitioners had met the deadline as prescribed under the scheme and the subsequent forwarding of recommendation by respondent no.2 cannot be attributed to the petitioners, which was not within their control.
8. The impugned communication dated 12th December, 2023 is therefore, quashed and set aside. The respondent no.2 is hereby directed to reconsider the proposal dated 23 rd November, 2020 and to extend the benefit envisaged under Page 7 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8154/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/01/2025 undefined the Scheme. Let, the decision be taken on such proposal preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
9. With these observations, present petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Sd/-
(NISHA M. THAKORE, J.) AMAR RATHOD...
Page 8 of 8 Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jan 20 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 20 21:33:02 IST 2025