Minority Status in J&K; SC hearing today J&K Govt opposes minority status to Hindus

By admin On Feb 6, 2017

VIVEK SHARMA
JAMMU: In the much publicised PIL related to setting up of Minority Commission in Jammu and Kashmir for extending benefits available to minorities, the State Government has filed the reply while the Centre has sought six weeks time.
The hearing on this PIL is on Monday in Supreme Court.
“I have received the copy of the reply which the State Government has filed,” said Advocate Ankur Sharma, adding that the State has opposed all the pleas made by him in the petition.
Further divulging inputs of State’s reply, Advocate Ankur Sharma, who is in New Delhi to appear in Supreme Court said “The J&K State has opposed my demands and is against giving minority benefits to Hindus despite the fact that Hindus are in minority in Jammu and Kashmir. This proves that State Government is against the Hindu community.”
“Will contest this anti-Hindu reply in the Apex Court during the hearing of the case scheduled for Monday,” Advocate Sharma said.
On 3rd January, 2017, when the much publicized matter in WPPIL No. 489/2016 titled Ankur Sharma versus Union of India and Others. seeking identification of religious and linguistic minorities in the State came up for hearing, Advocate Sharma (petitioner-in-person) strongly pressed for the suspension of minority schemes, ‘illegally’ being implemented in the State for the reason that the Central NCM Act is not applicable to J&K and the majority community of the State is illegally reaping the benefits of more than 50 minority schemes.
On last date of hearing, the Union of India and the State requested for some more time to reply. The court came down heavily upon them and imposed costs on both the governments. Sunil Fernandes had appeared for the State of J&K. Union of India was represented by a battery of lawyers. Advocate General J&K was also present in the court.
Jammu-based Advocate Ankur Sharma has alleged in his PIL that rights of religious and linguistic ‘minorities’ in the State were being “siphoned off illegally and arbitrarily” due to extension of benefits to “unqualified sections” of the population.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had thrice sought responses from the Centre and Jammu and Kashmir government on the PIL which alleged that benefits for minorities were being siphoned off by majority Muslim population in the State.
A bench, comprising Chief Justice T.S Thakur and D Y Chandrachud, had issued notices to Ministry of Minority Affairs of Jammu and Kashmir government, National Minority Commission and others seeking their replies on the plea which also sought the setting up of State Minority Commission for identification of minorities.
“The population of Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir, according to the 2011 Census is 68.31 per cent. Communities which are eligible to be notified as minorities, were not awarded their due share of scholarship owing to their non-identification as minorities, thereby jeopardising their constitutionally guaranteed rights enshrined under Part III of the Constitution of India.
“This clearly reflects the unfairness and discrimination of the State towards the communities in the state of Jammu and Kashmir which are eligible to be notified as minorities,” the petition alleged. The plea also sought directions to consider extension of National Commission for Minorities (NCM) Act, 1992 to Jammu and Kashmir and make amendments so that the benefits available to minorities of other states could also be given to the minorities of J and K. “Appoint a committee of experts functioning under the direct supervision of this court to submit a comprehensive report identifying communities of the State of Jammu and Kashmir which qualify as religious and linguistic minorities… “Constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by a High Court Judge (retired) working under direct supervision of this Court for investigating the illegal and arbitrary disbursement of minority benefits under the Prime Minister’s 15 Point Programme to the communities,” the PIL states.
On last hearing, the Supreme Court of India had imposed costs of Rs 15,000 each for not filing their reply in time. The apex court has directed payment of Rs 30,000 to the petitioner Ankur Sharma.
“The Centre has sent me a draft of 15,ooo while the State government has not paid anything,” revealed Advocate Ankur.