ATAUR RAHMAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Public Interest Litigation is filed seeking for a direction upon the respondents to show cause as to under what authority the respondents have passed the Notification No.39 dated 8.1.2013 issued by the Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand, under Section 4(2) of the Jharkhand State Minorities Commission Act, 2001, since in the said reconstituted Committee, all the minority communities have not been given adequate representation and also for quashing the notification dated 8.1.2013 passed by the respondentauthorities, in view of the fact that the minority communities have not been given adequate representation.

(2.) The object of the Bihar State Minority Commission Act, 1991 (as adopted by the State of Jharkhand) is to make provision for appointment and function of a Commission for investigating, ensuring and safeguarding the rights conferred upon the religious and linguistic minorities of the State by the Constitution of India and other connected matters. Section 6 of the Act deals with functions of the Commission and Section 8 provides power granted to the Commission to investigate. Section 4, which deals with constitution of the Commission, provides that the Commission shall consist of a Chairman, two Vice Chairman and maximum eight members, who shall be nominated by the State Government. After creation of the State of Jharkhand, the Bihar State Minority Commission Act, 1991 was adopted by the State of Jharkhand and the same was renamed as the Jharkhand State Minority Commission Act, 2001. In exercise of power conferred under Section 4 of the Jharkhand State Minority Commission Act, 2001, the Government of Jharkhand through its Welfare Department reconstituted the State Minority Commission by the Notification no.39 dated 8.1.2013 and nominated a Chairman, two Deputy Chairmen and eight Members, comprising of five Muslims and three others.

(3.) The petitioner claims to be a businessman operating a taxi. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Board so constituted is basically of such members who belong to one group itself and other minority groups, like Sikh, Jain and Christian, are not represented in the Minority Commission. According to the petitioner, the reconstitution of the Commission, vide Notification dated 8.1.2013, is a glaring example of arbitrary use of power and against the very spirit of setting up of the Minority Commission and the petitioner has filed this PIL seeking for setting aside of the notification.