A single bench of Justice Niral R Mehta on Tuesday rejected a plea difficult the structure of the committee and looking for the courtroom's path for its reconstitution as there was no illustration of minority communities.
The choice of the committee members could be “throughout the absolute area of the state authorities,” the courtroom mentioned.
On February 4 this yr, Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel introduced the formation of the committee to evaluate the need of the UCC and likewise to draft a invoice for it.
The panel is chaired by retired Supreme Courtroom choose Ranjana Desai. Its members embrace retired IAS officer C L Meena, advocate R C Kodekar, former Vice Chancellor Dakshesh Thakar and social activist Geetaben Shroff.
Within the detailed judgment made obtainable on the HC's web site, the bench famous the structure of the committee was purely an administrative choice.The courtroom mentioned it was of the agency opinion that when the UCC committee has been constituted purely by an govt order below Article 162 of the Structure of India, choice of its specific members could be “throughout the absolute area of the state authorities.” It's “completely justified for the state authorities to pick the members of the committee and for which, writ of mandamus can't be issued,” it mentioned.
“By constituting a committee, it can't be mentioned that prejudice is brought on to any class of individuals when extra significantly it's all the time open for any class of individuals to make illustration espousing their views on the Uniform Civil Code to the committee so constituted,” the courtroom mentioned.
It mentioned within the absence of any statutory provisions, the authority can't be anticipated or directed to behave in a selected method as it will be “unjustified and unwarranted interference within the purely administrative affairs of the state authorities,” it mentioned.
“Beneath the circumstances, I see no good cause to train extraordinary jurisdiction below Article 226 of the Structure of India in a realm of administrative selections taken below Article 162 of the Structure of India by the State of Gujarat,” the bench added.
The courtroom, subsequently, can't direct the state to behave in a selected method as any path and/ or order in that regard could be “unjustified and unwarranted interference within the purely administrative affairs of the state authorities,” it mentioned.
The petitioner, Surat resident Abdul Vahab Sopariwala, had approached the HC looking for a path to the state authorities to reconstitute the committee with recent members with the data and expertise over the topic regulation, and undertake a consultative course of involving all non secular and cultural communities earlier than any transfer to implement the UCC.
His lawyer had argued that members of the current committee are usually not consultants on the topic regulation and have an interest events, and subsequently the choice of members is towards the ideas of truthful play.
Even when the committee was fashioned with the target of implementation of the UCC, masking many private legal guidelines and touching minorities, there was no illustration of any minority communities within the panel, he mentioned.
The committee ought to thus be reconstituted by together with illustration from the minority communities in order that actual goal and object of the structure of the committee could be achieved, he had mentioned in his submission.
Advocate Common Kamal Trivedi mentioned in his submission that the structure of the committee is only an administrative motion and has nothing to do with any statutory responsibility of the state authorities.
There's, subsequently, no authorized requirement prescribed by any statute for and the way such committee could be constituted, he mentioned.
Accordingly, it can't be mentioned that the committee is in breach of any statutory or authorized duties, for which the courtroom would challenge its prerogative writ of mandamus by exercising its extraordinary powers below Article 226 of the Structure of India, he mentioned.
