Sayed Ashraf Hussain & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 4025 of 1982
Petitioner: Sayed Ashraf Hussain & Ors.
Respondent: State of U.P. & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 4025 of 1982
Judges: G.N. RAY & K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jan 15, 1998
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION
Constitution of India
Article 226, 136 – Writ by two mohammadans – High Court not interfering because of existence of disputed questions ( of facts ) alleged by petitioners and denied by respondents – Held that no interference is called for . Moreover, matter being of sensitive nature affecting the religious sentiments and potential danger to public tranquility, proper representation by Muslim Community to State Govt. suggested .
Constitution of India
Article 226, 136 – Writ by two mohammadans – High Court not interfering because of existence of disputed questions ( of facts ) alleged by petitioners and denied by respondents – Held that no interference is called for . Moreover, matter being of sensitive nature affecting the religious sentiments and potential danger to public tranquility, proper representation by Muslim Community to State Govt. suggested .
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
Two writ petitions namely WP No. 1736 of 1982 and WP No. 144 of 1980 were filed before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court by Ashraf Hussain and others . The High Court has observed in disposing of the writ petitions that the writ petitioners filed the writ petitions in their individual capacity and not re-presenting the Shia community . The correctness of such observa-tion has been seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant . It is not necessary for us to make any observation whether the writ petitions were filed by some members of the Shia community or the same was made in a representative capacity . It appears that the High Court has not interfered in the writ peti-tions by indicating that the existence of certain rights claimed by the Shia community as indicated in the writ petitions were not admitted by the respondents . The High Court therefore was of the view that such disputed questions should not be gone into in the writ petitions . The High Court however, observed that the matter was very sensitive and suitable orders were required to be passed by the Government so that harmony is maintained in the society . We do not think that interference against such order of the High Court is called for . These appeals are therefore disposed of . As it appears to us that the matter is very sensitive involving not only the religious sentiments between the two sects of the Muslim community but the disputes between the two sects are potentially dangerous to disturb public tranquility, it will be only appro-priate that if a proper representation is made by the appellants or other members of the Shia community to the State Government, such representation should be considered on its own merit by paying proper attention to the sensitive and emotive issues . In view of the disposal of the appeal, no order need be passed on the application for substitution .
Two writ petitions namely WP No. 1736 of 1982 and WP No. 144 of 1980 were filed before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court by Ashraf Hussain and others . The High Court has observed in disposing of the writ petitions that the writ petitioners filed the writ petitions in their individual capacity and not re-presenting the Shia community . The correctness of such observa-tion has been seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the appellant . It is not necessary for us to make any observation whether the writ petitions were filed by some members of the Shia community or the same was made in a representative capacity . It appears that the High Court has not interfered in the writ peti-tions by indicating that the existence of certain rights claimed by the Shia community as indicated in the writ petitions were not admitted by the respondents . The High Court therefore was of the view that such disputed questions should not be gone into in the writ petitions . The High Court however, observed that the matter was very sensitive and suitable orders were required to be passed by the Government so that harmony is maintained in the society . We do not think that interference against such order of the High Court is called for . These appeals are therefore disposed of . As it appears to us that the matter is very sensitive involving not only the religious sentiments between the two sects of the Muslim community but the disputes between the two sects are potentially dangerous to disturb public tranquility, it will be only appro-priate that if a proper representation is made by the appellants or other members of the Shia community to the State Government, such representation should be considered on its own merit by paying proper attention to the sensitive and emotive issues . In view of the disposal of the appeal, no order need be passed on the application for substitution .
