Religion, Caste And Tribe Based Reservation - 4

[Bodhi]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Court raps government on Sachar Committee report</b>

New Delhi, May 12 : Terming it an "unconstitutional move", the Delhi High Court Monday asked the central government <b>why only the Muslim community has been chosen for implementation of the Sachar Committee report while other minority communities were left out.</b>

A division bench of Justice T.S.Thakur and Justice Siddharth Mridul, while issuing notice to the central government, observed: <b>“Poverty is a common enemy. It does not come to one community in particular.”</b>

Posing questions to the government, the bench asked: “Does the Sachar Committee recommend facilities to other communities as well?”

“This is an unconstitutional move by the government,” observed the bench.

The court was hearing a public interest petition filed by the Rashtriya Mukti Morcha, a volunatry organisation, which alleged that the committee report and the government's follow-up action were unconstitutional.

The government, however, rejected the view that it was giving any special treatment to any community.

The government set up a committee, headed by former Delhi High Court judge, Justice Rajinder Sachar, to look into the social, economic and educational status of Muslims and suggest ways to improve it. The committee's report was presented to parliament Nov 30, 2006.

Advocate P.N. Lekhi, who filed the petition, sought to know whether the Sachar panel report had not treated Muslims "in a manner inconsistent with the treatment given to other recognised minorities".

The public suit also raised the question "whether it was tainted with the logic of racial compartmentalisation and communitarianism, whether it did not promise the rise of political Islam in India in violation of the constitution, and whether Muslims, who had 'ruled' the peninsula, could be treated as a minority."

<b>Lekhi said any promotion of Muslims as a religious minority would result in "destruction" of the secular polity promised by the constitution and was thus against its basic structure.</b>

http://www.newkerala.com/one.php?action=...s&id=59258<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Sachar: HC asks Govt aren’t you appeasing, what about majority?
NEW DELHI, MAY 12

The Centre today came in for some searching questions from the Delhi High Court on implementation of the Sachar Committee recommendations for welfare of Muslims when a Bench asked the government “is this meant to appease some community?... <b>a lot of money is spent in a welfare state, is it that you (Centre) spend it only for one minority community?”</b>

The Centre, represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) P P Malhotra, was briefing a Bench of Justices T S Thakur and Siddharth Mridul on the “targeted intervention” intended by the Centre, including basic amenities and job opportunities for “90 identified minority concentration districts and opening of more branches by public sector banks in Muslim concentrated areas”.

Midway through the briefing, Justice Thakur, the senior judge on the Bench, interrupted the ASG with a query on the Centre’s actual intention behind setting up the Sachar panel.

“Is this meant to appease some community? <b>If you intend to fight poverty, cut across religions and communities and fight. Never mind whether it is a Hindu poor or a Muslim poor,” said Justice Thakur.</b>

“When you say in your Action Taken Report on the Sachar recommendations that <b>‘we will spend more for this minority community... does it mean that you will spend less for the major community?”</b> he asked.

Reminding the ASG that “we live in a welfare state”, the Bench observed: “There are Sikhs, Muslims and Christians here... Why are you not doing it (welfare measures) for the majority community?”

Malhotra contended that Muslims were more in print in the report because they were “India’s biggest minority community” — a justification oft-repeated by the government counsel during the entire duration of the court hearing.

The Sachar Committee, set up to report on the social, economic and educational status of the Muslim community, submitted its report in November 2006. The “major decisions” proposed by the government, as per the summary text submitted in court, include improving deficient civic and economic opportunities in “338 identified towns and cities with a substantial population of Minorities, including Muslims”, an inter-ministerial group to monitor a programme to better their skill and entrepreneurial development, expand the outreach of upper primary schools, particularly for Muslim girls.

“The Sachar Committee report is for all. <b>Of course, there are certain Muslim dominated areas where there is no development at all,” the ASG said.
To this, the Bench said: “So are you saying there are no Hindu slums?”

“Tell us Mr Malhotra, in our Constitutional framework, can a welfare scheme say we concentrate only on the benefit of one community and not for all?... A lot of money is spent in a welfare state, is it that you (Centre) spend it only for one minority community?” the Bench asked the ASG. </b>

The ASG assured the court that “special care is taken care of all minorities” but drew the line by adding that “political issues be best left to the public to decide during elections. Courts cannot decide”.

http://www.indianexpress.com/printerFrie...08756.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->