Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Rashtrabhasha Mahasangh and Mumbai Rashtriya Rashtrabhasha Prachar Sabha, along with their office bearers, filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Official Language Act, 1963, and in the alternative, seeking to quash Section 3(5) of the Act as unconstitutional. The petitioners are societies registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860, and also public trusts under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, with the object of promoting the Hindi language. During the pendency of the petition, some of the individual petitioners expired. The petitioners argued that the subject of official language is deliberately not included in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and therefore does not form part of the legislative scheme commencing from Article 246 up to Article 254. They contended that this omission renders the Official Language Act, 1963 unconstitutional. The respondent, Union of India, represented by the Department of Official Languages, Ministry of Home Affairs, opposed the petition. The court, comprising Acting Chief Justice B. P. Dharmadhikari and Justice N. R. Borkar, heard the matter. The court observed that the subject of official language is not included in the Seventh Schedule, but this does not make the Act unconstitutional because the Constitution itself provides for the official language in Articles 343 to 351. The court dismissed the petition, holding that the Official Language Act, 1963 is not unconstitutional and that Section 3(5) does not violate the constitutional provisions. The judgment was delivered on March 12, 2020.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Official Language - Validity of Official Language Act, 1963 - Articles 343-351, Constitution of India - Petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of the Official Language Act, 1963 and Section 3(5) thereof, arguing that the subject of official language is deliberately omitted from the Seventh Schedule and thus falls outside the legislative scheme from Article 246 to Article 254. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the Act is not unconstitutional and that Section 3(5) does not violate the constitutional provisions. (Paras 1-3) B) Constitutional Law - Legislative Competence - Official Language - Seventh Schedule - Article 246, Constitution of India - The Court noted that the subject of official language is not included in the Seventh Schedule, but this does not render the Official Language Act, 1963 unconstitutional as the Constitution itself provides for the official language in Articles 343-351. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Official Language Act, 1963, particularly Section 3(5), is unconstitutional and violates the constitutional scheme of official language under Articles 343-351 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The Official Language Act, 1963 is not unconstitutional and Section 3(5) thereof is not unconstitutional.
Law Points
- Constitutional validity of Official Language Act
- 1963
- Section 3(5) of Official Language Act
- Articles 343-351 of Constitution of India
- Seventh Schedule
- Article 246
- Article 254
- Official language policy
- Hindi promotion
