29 Nov 2022 8:58 AM GMT
A Supreme Court Advocate-On-Record has written a letter to the Attorney General for India, R. Venkataramani, seeking his consent for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against the Information Commissioner, CIC-Uday Mahurkar claiming that he lowered the authority of the Supreme Court of India in his Order. Essentially, in an order dated 25-11-2022, the Information...
A Supreme Court Advocate-On-Record has written a letter to the Attorney General for India, R. Venkataramani, seeking his consent for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against the Information Commissioner, CIC-Uday Mahurkar claiming that he lowered the authority of the Supreme Court of India in his Order.
Essentially, in an order dated 25-11-2022, the Information Commissioner, Uday Mahurkar had observed that the Supreme Court's Judgment in All India Imam Organisation and v.Union of India and ors. [May 1993] was passed in violation of the constitution and had set a wrong precedent.
It may be noted that All India Imam Organisation case (supra), the Supreme Court had directed the waqf board to give remuneration to imams in mosques managed by it.
In his letter written to the Attorney General for India, Supreme Court Advocate-On-Record Aldanish Rein has categorically stated that the alleged contemnor had Scandalized and lowered the authority of the Supreme Court.
"The Alleged contemnor who is not even a Law Graduate to understand the nuances of Law has gone ahead and observed that the Judgment passed by two learned Judges of the supreme court was passed in violation of the constitution and has set a wrong precedent. The Alleged contemnor without any substantial material before him and only on the basis of his imagination went on to further justify its attempt of lowering the authority of the Supreme Court..."
Essentially, the Information Commissioner Uday Mahurkar made this observation while hearing an RTI application filed by an activist seeking details of salaries being paid to imams by the Delhi government and the Delhi Waqf Board. In his order of November 25, 2022, he also observed that the 1993 ruling of the SC had set a wrong precedent.
In its order, the IC had further observed that the Supreme Court's order had violated constitutional provisions that say the taxpayers' money will not be used to favor any particular religion. Further, he had also directed that the order copy be forwarded to the Union Law Minister with the commission's recommendation for suitable action.
"Further with regard to the judgment by the Supreme Court in the case between "All India Imam Organisation And ... vs Union Of India And Ors" on 13 May, 1993, that opened the doors to special financial benefits from public treasury to only Imams and muezzins in the mosques, the Commission observes that the highest Court of the country in passing this order acted in violation of the provisions of the Constitution, particularly Article 27, which says that the tax payers money will not be used to favour any particular religion. The Commission notes that the said judgment set a wrong precedent in the country and has become a point of unnecessary political slugfest and also social disharmony in the society," the relevant part of the order of Information Commissioner Uday Mahurkar reads thus.
In his letter, the AOR Aldanish Rein has also objected to the observation of the IC that giving salaries to Imams and others only in mosques, amounts to not just betraying the Hindu Community and members of other non- Muslim Minority religions but also encouraging pan - Islamist tendencies amongst a section of Indian Muslims which are already visible.
"The Language adopted by the above information commissioner is not only contemptuous but is also an attempt to disgrace the Muslim community and further spread disharmony amongst different communities on the strength of the Supreme Court Order for some ulterior motives."