Selection of UCC panel members within state govt's domain: Gujarat HC

The Gujarat High Court has said the setting up of a five-member committee on Uniform Civil Code (UCC) by the state government cannot be said to have caused prejudice to any class of people, and does not warrant its interference.

A single bench of Justice Niral R Mehta on Tuesday rejected a plea challenging the constitution of the committee and seeking the court's direction for its reconstitution as there was no representation of minority communities.

The selection of the committee members would be "within the absolute domain of the state government," the court said.

On February 4 this year, Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel announced the formation of the committee to assess the necessity of the UCC and also to draft a bill for it.

 

The panel is chaired by retired Supreme Court judge Ranjana Desai. Its members include retired IAS officer C L Meena, advocate R C Kodekar, former Vice Chancellor Dakshesh Thakar and social activist Geetaben Shroff.

In the detailed judgment made available on the HC's website, the bench noted the constitution of the committee was purely an administrative decision.

The court said it was of the firm opinion that once the UCC committee has been constituted purely by an executive order under Article 162 of the Constitution of India, selection of its particular members would be "within the absolute domain of the state government."  It is "perfectly justified for the state authorities to select the members of the committee and for which, writ of mandamus cannot be issued," it said.

"By constituting a committee, it cannot be said that prejudice is caused to any class of people when more particularly it is always open for any class of people to make representation espousing their views on the Uniform Civil Code to the committee so constituted," the court said.

It said in the absence of any statutory provisions, the authority cannot be expected or directed to act in a particular manner as it would be "unjustified and unwarranted interference in the purely administrative affairs of the state authorities," it said.

"Under the circumstances, I see no good reason to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a realm of administrative decisions taken under Article 162 of the Constitution of India by the State of Gujarat," the bench added.

The court, therefore, cannot direct the state to act in a particular manner as any direction and/ or order in that regard would be "unjustified and unwarranted interference in the purely administrative affairs of the state authorities," it said.

The petitioner, Surat resident Abdul Vahab Sopariwala, had approached the HC seeking a direction to the state government to reconstitute the committee with fresh members with the knowledge and experience over the subject law, and adopt a consultative process involving all religious and cultural communities before any move to implement the UCC.

His lawyer had argued that members of the present committee are not experts on the subject law and are interested parties, and therefore the selection of members is against the principles of fair play.

Even when the committee was formed with the objective of implementation of the UCC, covering many personal laws and touching minorities, there was no representation of any minority communities in the panel, he said.

The committee should thus be reconstituted by including representation from the minority communities so that real purpose and object of the constitution of the committee can be achieved, he had said in his submission.

Advocate General Kamal Trivedi said in his submission that the constitution of the committee is purely an administrative action and has nothing to do with any statutory duty of the state government.

There is, therefore, no legal requirement prescribed by any statute for and how such committee can be constituted, he said.

Accordingly, it cannot be said that the committee is in breach of any statutory or legal duties, for which the court would issue its prerogative writ of mandamus by exercising its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, he said.