Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. Case set out in the petition is that the petitioner passed his +2 examination in the year 2007. He appeared for counselling but was not selected. His chance of selection was affected on account of 50% seats having been exclusively reserved for the members of the Sikh community in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, vide notification dated 3.4.2001, Annexure P.7. Further, notification dated 18.6.2007 was issued permitting minority quota and NRI seats to be divided between the government quota and minority quota, thereby affecting meritorious candidates. Notification dated 26.4.2006 has also been issued under Section 2(f) of the Punjab Private Health Sciences Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Fee and Making of Reservation) Act, 2006 declaring that Christians and Sikh Institutions run by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) to be minority institutions for the purpose of the Act (Annexure P.11). The said notification was also contrary to law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Prayer made is that if declaration of Sikhs as minority is declared void, the petitioner has every chance of getting admission on his own merit. It has also been stated that Sikhs are in majority in the State of Punjab but the basis of the impugned notification Annexure P.7 is that number of Sikhs was minority in the country which was not legally permissible basis.

The SGPC has been constituted under the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 (in short, 'the 1925 Act') for better administration of Sikh Gurdwaras. The SGPC is an inter-State body as per Section 72 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 and has electoral jurisdiction outside the State of Punjab also. The SGPC also looks after the Sikh minority community in all the States and is, thus, a minority organisation. Under Section 2(9) of the 1925 Act, the word 'Sikh' is defined as under:

Sikh means a person who professes the Sikh religion or, in the case of deceased person, who professed the Sikh religion or was known to be a Sikh during his life time.

4. In the reply filed by the SGPC, it has been stated that the 1925 Act was enacted on account of agitations in which over 65000 persons were arrested and about 400 persons lost their lives. The area of operation of SGPC comprises Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh and parts of Himachal Pradesh. 15 persons, of whom not more than 5% are from Punjab, are co-opted by the elected members and thus, SGPC is a representative body of Sikhs from all over the country. Under Section 72(3) of the 1925 Act, SGPC is an inter-State body. The plea regarding leaving of questions relating to minority open in TMA Pai Foundation (supra) and definition of 'Sikh under Section 2(9) of the 1925 Act, has also been repeated. It has been further mentioned that followers of sects known as Nirmalas, Ramraiyas, Dhirmalias, Udasis, Namdhari Kukas, Nirankaris, Radhasoamis, followers of Divya Jyoti Jagran Samiti, followers of Dera Sacha Sauda of Sirsa, followers of Baba Bhaniarewala cannot be considered to be Sikhs. Some of them believe in a living Guru, which is contrary to the basic tenets of Sikh faith. Hukamnamas have been issued by the Akal Takht Sahib against Nirankaris, followers of Divya Jyoti Jagran Samiti, followers of Dera Sacha Sauda of Sirsa etc., declaring that they are not Sikhs and calling upon the Sikh community to severe all social and cultural relations with them. On account of influx of persons of different religions from other States in Punjab, Sikhs are in minority. No census have been conducted as per definition of Sikh under the 1925 Act. In the elections of the SGPC held in 2004, number of eligible Sikh electors in Punjab were 53,97,988 as against total voters being 1,65,71,585. As per prospectus of Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, a Sikh has been separately defined and following provision has been made:

9. Learned Counsel for the State and the SGPC submitted that the population of Sikhs should be taken to be equal to the members of electoral college for voting in the SGPC elections, as mere declaration by any citizen that he was a Sikh, was not enough to treat him as a Sikh. The expression Sikh as commonly understood may also include several other sects such as Udasis, Nirmalas etc, which were not covered by the definition of Sikh under Section 2(9) of the 1925 Act and the impugned notification was justified on that basis and the question whether Sikhs were not minority in the State of Punjab involved a question of fact, which could not be gone into by this Court. Reliance has been placed on a judgment of the Privy Council in Hem Singh and Ors. v. Basant Das and Anr. AIR 1936 Privy Council 93, judgment of Lahore High Court in Ram Parshad and Ors. v. Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar and Ors. AIR 1931 Lahore 161, holding that Udasis were not Sikhs for the purposes of 1925 Act and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mahant harnam Singh v. Gurdial Singh and Anr. AIR 1967 SC 805, holding that Nirmala Sadhus were not Sikhs. Reliance has also been placed on judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee v. Mahant Harnam Singh and Ors. and Pritam Dass Mahant v. Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee , in support of the submission that the term Sikh had a restricted meaning in the context of Section 2(9) of the 1925 Act.