Ayisa Banu - Writ Appeal

7/27/2019 Ayisa Banu - Writ Appeal

1/14

MEMORANDUM OF GROUNDS OF WRIT APPEAL

(UNDER CLAUSE 15 0F LETTERS PATENT)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADRASMADURAI BENCH

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.A. No. of 2013

- In -

W.P. (MD) No.10992 of 2013(On the file of the High Court of Judicature

Madras at Madurai Bench)

AyishaBanu,W/o. Thiru. BakeerMaideen,No. 59/81, MohameedSalihapuram,Pallivasal 1st Street,13 Ward,Kovilpatti 628501,Thoothukudi District. . . . Appellant / Petitioner

- Vs

1. Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs,Through its Secretary,

Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri,New Delhi 21.

2. The Protector General of Emigrants,Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs,

9th

floor, Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri,New Delhi -21.

3.The principal Secretary and Commissioner,Commissionerate of Rehabilitation and Welfare ofNon-Resident Tamils, Chepauk, Chennai 5.

4. The District Collector,Collectrate,Thoothukudi Dist,

Korampallam,Thoothukudi. . . . Respondents / Respondents

MEMORANDUM OF GROUNDS OF WRIT APPEAL


2/14

The address for service of all processes and notices to the

appellant is that of his counsels M/s. V. Rajiv Rufus, M. Maran,

N.Sobanabai, at 2/274, Thilahar Street, KurinchiNagar,

Narayanapuram, Madurai-14.


Respondents is as stated above.

The above named appellant prefers this memorandum of

grounds of writ appeal against the order passed by Honble Mr.

Justice Manikumar made in W.P. (MD) No.10992 of 2013 dated

10.07.2013 for the following among other.

GROUNDS

a.That the Honble Single Judge failed to consider the merit andurgency of the case though it is warranting immediate direction

from the court in consideration of the fact and circumstance of

the case.

b.It is submitted that as it is mentioned in Article 348(2) of theConstitution of India, which reads as follows, notwithstanding

anything in sub-clause (a) of clause (1), the Governor of a State

may, with the previous consent of the President, authorise the

use of the Hindi language, or any other language used for any

official purposes of the State, in proceedings in the High Court

having its principal seat in that State. In this juncture the

State assembly of the Tamil Nadu has passed a resolution

unanimously to bring Tamil as a court language in the High

Court of Tamil Nadu and the same decision was sent to the


3/14

President of India to obtain consent in 2006 itself. The same

was sent twice to the Honble Supreme Court of India. But the

same was a futile exercise as the same was not required to be

done by the Constitution of India. Later, the Supreme Court

has rejected the resolution passed unanimously by the assembly

of the Tamil Nadu. The same may not bind the aspiration of the

people of Tamil Nadu as the opinion of the Supreme Court is

not required, as the same is not demanded by the Constitution

of India.

Thus, when a state has spent its valuable time in the

exercise of passing a anonymous resolution and the center has

failed to satisfy the aspiration of the people of Tamil Nadu.

Therefore the people, having supported by a unanimous

resolution passed by the paramount law making body of the

state, would entitle to enjoy the said right without any

intervention as it has to be deemed to be law of the land.

C. It is submitted that it is pertinent to mention here that after the

resolution of the state assembly, that was endorsed by this

Honble Court through a full court reference. Thus, the consent

given through the full court reference which would bind every

Hon'ble judges of this Honble High court and going against the

said reference is arbitrary and unconstitutional.

D. It is submitted that the Mathili Mai Vs Veda Moorthi, 1970 (3)

SCC 738 is relied by the Honble Single judge in passing the

impugned order is not maintainable in the eyes of law. Because,


4/14

as discussed in the said decision, the Attorney General and

some of the members of the Bench were unable to understand

Hindi, hence, the Honble Supreme court had insisted the Raj

Narayanan to argue his case in English that too only on the

second day since the Attorney General opposed the Hindi

argument, though Mr. Raj Narayanan was allowed to advance

his argument in Hindi on first day. But, here the existing

situation is diametrically opposite as the government advocate

is well conversant with Tamil and the Government advocate has

not objected the Tamil argument and it is not the case of the

Honble judge that he could not understand Tamil. In such a

situation, not allowing the counsel to argue in Tamil is arbitrary

and would not enable to meet the ends of justice.

E. It is submitted that in 2007, the Honble High Court has

accepted the resolution passed by the Tamil Nadu State

assembly which requested the president to give assent to make

Tamil as court language and subsequently, in 2010 also, the

chief Justice of Madras High court has once again accepted the

demand of the lawyers to allow them to argue in Tamil.

Therefore, going back in their word would be promissory

estoppels and the same cannot be allowed in a country where

the rule of law is existing, that too by a constitutional

functionary.

F. It is submitted that when legislative and executive functions are

allowed in Tamil language, judicial body which is the most


5/14

important wing of the state is forced to adopt a foreign language

against the wish and beyond the knowledge of the people. This

is unconstitutional in the letter and spirit of the constitution.

G. It is submitted that in AIR 1977 ALLHABAD 164 entitled

Prabhandhak Samiti and another vs Zila Vidyalaya

Nirikshak, Allahabad and others, the Honble Division Bench of

Allahabad High court has decided as follows,6. It cannot be

doubted that the proceedings of the courts functioning for the

benefit of the inhabitants of any place must on principle be

conducted in a language understood by them. It does not

appear to be sufficiently realized that the employment of an

indigenous language is essential for maintaining the democratic

character of the Courts. They can be linked with the people onlyby using their language; it is a necessary democratic feature of

the Courts and one of the foundations of socialist justice.

In para 14,This is clear from the non

obstante clause with which Article 348(2) opens. It is thus

made possible to permit the use of Hindi language for

proceedings in the High Court by an appropriate order of the

Governor of the State under Article 348(2) despite the

provisions of Article 348(1). Accordingly by a notification made

under Article 348(2) in the year 1961 the Governor of Uttar

Pradesh permitted the use of Hindi language for purposes of

arguments in criminal cases. By a similar order made in 1966

the Governor had permitted the use of Hindi language for the

purpose of arguments in civil cases as well. But the most

notable step in this direction was the order dated 5th September,

1969 issued by the Governor of U.P. with the previous consent

of the President under Article 348(2).


6/14

Thus, though arguments in criminal cases in 1961 and in

civil cases in 1966 were allowed in Hindi respectively, the

consent of the President was granted in 1969 only. But, the

Honble High court has accommodated the aspiration of the

people at the larger interest of the people. Denying such rights

and aspiration of people from a particular state say Tamil Nadu

is against the principles of equality as enshrined in the

constitution of India.

H.Because the need to make the judicial system people friendly

and drag it away from the distance created by our colonial

masters from the people has to be redressed and one of the

most essential and efficient way to do this is to enforce usage of

state language which will facilitate identifying of the masses

with the state and also provide speedy justice.

H. Because the need to make Tamil a court language was many a

times insisted and discussed by out representative in

parliament.

I. That the article 350 runs as follows,:-

350. Language to be used in representations for redress ofgrievances Every person shall be entitled to submit a representationfor the redress of any grievance to any officer or authority of the

Union or a State in any of the languages used in the Union or in theState, as the case may be

Also, article 350 a runs as follows:-


7/14

350A. Facilities for instruction in mother-tongue atprimary stage.- It shall be the endeavour of every State and ofevery local authority within the State to provide adequate facilitiesfor instruction in the mother-tongue at the primary stage ofeducation to children belonging to linguistic minority groups; andthe President may issue such directions to any State as he considersnecessary or proper for securing the provision of such facilities.

Thus, the above mentioned articles of our constitution are

insisting the necessity of the mother tongue in education and in

approaching various government authorities. Therefore, keeping

stringent view regarding the court language is not supported by the

spirit and letter of the constitution of India. The forefathers of ourcountry and legal luminaries have visualized a parity among the

various languages to save the effective administration of the country.

But, the order of the Single Judge has axed that.

J. It is submitted that the well-known former Supreme Court Judge

V.R. Krishna Iyer is praised for the democratic and vibrant opinions

given by him in many social issues. Regarding the judicial system,

the said Honble Judge opined that, the justice system should be

such that the common man, the worker, the peasants and the social

activists will be able to argue before them. Thus, regarding the

court language, the same judge opined that, the language of the law

should be made simple, lucid and understandable enough for the

common man.

K. It is submitted that the former Chief Justice of Madras high

Court, Mr. M.M.Ismail has given a detailed article in the preamble

of the law journal ( Theerppu thirattu) about the hegemony of the

English language over the Indian languages and it deprives common

men from actively participating in judicial process and to an extent

denies access to justice. He also further states the Indian freedom

movement had an aim not just to oppose alien British power but also

bring equality in all realm of public life including political, economic,


8/14

cultural and social development. In this above sense, if the language

common people speak is adopted as an official language one can

realize the vision and ideal of freedom movement described above.

L. It is submitted that our constitution not only guarantees

enforcement of fundamental right to the citizens of this country but

also secures the process of securing the same. Therefore dismissing a

Writ Petition on the ground that an advocate was representing the

clients case in Tamil that too when arguing in a Writ Petition would

be improper and beyond legality.

Value of the Writ Petition : Incapable of Valuation

Court fee Paid : Rs.200/-

Value of Writ Appeal : Incapable of Valuation

Court fee Paid : Rs.200/-

Dated at Madurai on this 23rdday of July, 2013.

Counsel for the Appellant/Petitioner.


9/14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADRAS

MADURAI BENCH(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.A. No. of 2013

AyishaBanu,W/o. Thiru. BakeerMaideen,No. 59/81, MohameedSalihapuram,Pallivasal 1st Street,13 Ward,Kovilpatti 628 501,

Thoothukudi District. . . . Appellant / Petitioner

- Vs

Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs,Through its Secretary,

Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri,New Delhi 21.

and 3 others . . . Respondents / Respondents

INDEX TO TYPED SET OF PAPERS

SI.No. Date Particulars Page No.

Certified that the documents above mentioned are the true

copies of their originals.

Dated at Madurai on this 23rdday of July, 2013.

Counsel for the Appellant.


10/14


11/14

come over to Kovilpatti, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state

as under:

1. That I am the Petitioner herein and I am well acquainted withthe facts of the case and as such I am competent to swear this

affidavit.

2. I submit that I filed a Writ Petition challenging the order of ----------- on the file of the Respondent that ------------- .

3. I submit that this Honble Court vide order dated 18.04.2009dismissed my Writ Petition holding that it was ------------ .

4. I submit that the copy of the order was applied on ---- and thesame was made ready on ------------- and it was delivered on ----

---------. I was mentally upset with the whole episode of

suspension and the litigations, I was in total dismay. And I did

not have sufficient funds also to file an appeal on time.

5. I submit that I have preferred the instant writ appeal. But thereis a delay of ------- days in filing this writ appeal. Therefore I

was advised to file a petition to condone the delay in filing the

appeal. The delay is neither willful nor wanton. Unless the delay

of ----- days is condoned I will be put to irreparable loss and

hardship.

It is most respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may be

pleased to condone the delay of ---- days in filing the Appeal in

W.A.S.R. No. of 2012 and thus render Justice.


12/14

That since by virtue of the impugned order, the Petitioner is on

prolonged suspension for more than a period of 14 months, it is

prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to stay the operation of

the Order of suspension in R.C.A3/36641/2008 dated 24.12.2008 on

the file of Respondent pending disposal of the instant Writ Appeal

and thus render justice.

Solemnly affirmed after the contents are explainedto him in Tamil and having understood PETITIONER

the same on this day of July, 2013and signed his name in my presence

BEFORE ME

ADVOCATE


13/14

MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITIONUNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADRAS ATMADURAI BENCH

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

W.P. (MD) No. of 2013

AyishaBanu,W/o. Thiru. BakeerMaideen,No. 59/81, MohameedSalihapuram,

Pallivasal 1st Street,13 Ward,Kovilpatti 628 501,Thoothukudi District. . . . Appellant / Petitioner

- Vs

1. Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs,Through its Secretary,

Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri,

New Delhi 21.

2. The Protector General of Emigrants,Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs,9th floor, Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri,New Delhi -21.

3.The principal Secretary and Commissioner,Commissionerate of Rehabilitation and Welfare of

Non-Resident Tamils, Chepauk, Chennai 5.

4. The District Collector,Korampallam,Thoothukudi. . . . Respondents / Respondents

WRIT PETITION


appellant is that of his counsels M/s. V. Rajiv Rufus, M. Maran,

N.Sobanabai, at 2/274, Thilahar Street, Kurinchi Nagar,

Narayanapuram, Madurai-14.


14/14


Respondents is as stated above.

For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most

respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a

Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of --------------- and pass

such further order or order suitable orders as this Honble Court may

deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case and thus

render Justice.

Dated at Madurai on this 23rd July, 2013.

Counsel for the Petitioner.

Documents

Ayisa Banu - Writ Appeal