February 2, 2023
Supreme Court Seeks Centre

A bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath was listening to the petition.


The Supreme Court immediately refused to entertain requests towards the caste survey in Bihar. Calling it “publicity interest litigation”, the court docket questioned why did not the petitioners go to Patna High Court on this matter. Three petitions have been filed within the Supreme Court towards the caste headcount — one by an organisation referred to as Ek Soch Ek Prayas, proper wing outfit Hindu Sena, and a Bihar resident referred to as Akhilesh Kumar.

“So this is a publicity interest litigation. How can we issue directions on how much reservation should be granted to such and such caste. Sorry, we can’t issue such directions and can’t entertain these petitions”, the bench, comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath, instructed the counsel for petitioners.

Notably, this difficulty was already heard within the Patna High Court when the petitioner’s rivalry that the state is conducting a caste-based census was rejected on the bottom that the official notification on this regard says it is a caste primarily based ‘survey’.

Hindu Sena has mentioned in its petition that the Bihar authorities desires to “break the integrity and unity of India” by conducting a caste census.

There has been a requirement to cancel the notification issued by the state authorities on June 6 for the caste survey in Bihar.

Akhilesh Kumar’s petition states that the official notification and the method are “illegal, arbitrary, irrational, unconstitutional and without authority of law”.

“The Constitution of India prohibits discrimination on the basis of race and caste. The state is under a constitutional obligation to eliminate caste strife and racial strife,” the petition mentioned.

The petition additionally questions whether or not the Constitution of India has given the state authorities the fitting to conduct census on the premise of caste.

Seven questions have been raised on this petition earlier than the Supreme Court.

  1. Is the Bihar authorities taking motion to conduct caste census a violation of the essential construction of the structure?
  2. Does the Constitution of India give the state authorities the fitting to conduct caste census?
  3. Is the notification issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Bihar on June 6 towards the Census Act 1948?
  4. Is the notification of caste census, within the absence of regulation, legally legitimate?
  5. Is the state authorities’s determination to conduct caste census supported by all political events?
  6. Is the choice of political events on caste census binding on the federal government for Bihar?
  7. Is the Bihar authorities’s notification of June 6 towards the Supreme Court’s structure bench’s determination within the Abhiram Singh case?

On January 11, the highest court docket had mentioned that it could take up the matter on January 20, after one of many petitioners talked about an pressing itemizing of the matter.

Featured Video Of The Day

Watch: Anant Ambani, Radhika Merchant Dazzle In Ethnic Outfits At Their Engagement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *