Titles Like 'Raja' Can't Be Used In Courts, Public Offices Etc As They Are Prohibited Under Articles 14, 18 & 363A Of Constitution : Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has held that the use of salutations and titles such as "Raja", "Nawab" and "Rajkumar" in constitutional courts, all other Courts, tribunals, public offices of the State etc. is prohibited in terms of Articles 14, 18 and 363A of the Constitution of India. The court ordered that the said restriction will also apply in the public domain as well as public documents & public offices. Justice Sameer Jain, ruled, "In the light of above, this Court holds that in Constitutional Courts, all other Courts, Tribunals, public offices of the State etc., the use of salutation and titles is prohibited in terms of Articles 14 18 and 363A of the Constitution of India. The said restriction will also apply in the public domain as well as public documents & public offices."The Court took up the issue on noticing that a respondent in the cause-title of a petition was addressed as "Raja Laxman Singh". The Court pursued Article 14, 18 and 363A of the Constitution of India and observed that any title awarded to the citizen of India by a Foreign State cannot be accepted nor used and no such title, other than the military or academic distinctions, can be conferred other than by the State. The Court also observed that in terms of Article 363A, the heredity titles of nobility being in conflict with the principles of equality and contrary to Article 14 cannot be used as prefixes or suffixes. In this regard, the court also relied on the cases of Raghunathrao Ganpatrao Vs. Union of India: 1994 [(Suppl.)1 SCC 191] and Balaji Raghavan Vs. Union of India [AIR 1996 SC 770]. Further, the Court ordered the Registry to send copy of this order to the office of the Advocate General, Rajasthan; Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India; Registrar General of the High Court Court as well as the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur for necessary implementation, circulation and to issue necessary directions. The Court noted that the prohibition of titles in the public domain, public offices, Constitutional Courts or in public was not objected to by the petitioners, respondents or any other person. The court pointed out that ASG has also not filed any objection to the order passed by this Court and against the provisions of Articles 14, 18 and 363A of the Constitution of India as well as use of the titles which are unconstitutional. Moreover, the court directed the petitioners to file amended cause title at all respective places. Mr. M.S. Singhvi, Advocate General appearing for the State contended that in the light of Articles 14, 18 and 363A as well as in Raghunathrao Ganpatrao, the constitutional validity of 26th Amendment has been upheld. He added that the State of Rajasthan do endorse the view that use of prefixes and suffixes, other than military or academic distinction in terms of Article 18, are abolished and are violative of Article 14. He also submitted that the same cannot be used in the public offices, constitutional courts or in public domains. He further submitted that the State has a respect for the contribution and the public welfare, philanthropy offered by the royal families in the past. The counsel for the respondents Mr. Vagish Kr. Singh submitted that the Apex Court in Balaji Raghavan has upheld the validity of 26th Amendment and Article 363A of the Constitution of India and has imposed prohibition on the conferment of titles of nobility and the heredity titles of nobility as the same are in conflict with the principles of equality. In the present matter, the Rajasthan High Court had earlier issued notice to the Central and State Governments asking as to whether any person can put Maharaja, Raja, Nawab, Rajkumar titles as a prefix while filing cases in the High Court or Trial Court. On 11.01.2022, the Bench of Justice Sameer Jain had sought the reply of the Union and Rajasthan Government after perusing the cause title of a petition, wherein, the Court noted, the respondent No.1 in the matter was titled as "Raja Laxman Singh". Notably, when the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said title was filed before the trial court and as a result of the same had to be repeated/ generated before the High Court, the court directed that limited notices be issued to the Additional Solicitor General and the Advocate General for the State to address the Court on the following issue: " Whether after the insertion of Article 363-A and 26th Amendment in the Constitution of India, the said title of Raja,Nawab, Maharaja,Rajkumar as prefix can be filed/ addressed in the constitutional court or the learned trial court below" Also Read: Can 'Raja/Nawab/Maharaja/Rajkumar' Titles Be Used As Prefix In Constitutional, Lower Courts?: Rajasthan HC Asks Centre, State Adv. Suruchi Kasliwal appeared for the petitioners, while Adv. Vagish Kr. Singh, Adv. for Mr. Adv. Aashish Kr. ...

Titles Like 'Raja' Can't Be Used In Courts, Public Offices Etc As They Are Prohibited Under Articles 14, 18 & 363A Of Constitution : Rajasthan High Court

ANIRUDH VIJAY

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

ANIRUDH VIJAY

Titles Like 'Raja' Can't Be Used In Courts, Public Offices Etc As They Are Prohibited Under Articles 14, 18 & 363A Of Constitution : Rajasthan High Court

ANIRUDH VIJAY

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

ANIRUDH VIJAY

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers