M A I N   N E W S

SC upholds 2-child norm for Haryana panches
S. S. Negi
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, July 30
Shutting the doors for a person with more than two children for holding any post in the panchayati raj bodies in Haryana, the Supreme Court today put its stamp of approval on the constitutional validity of a law passed by the state disqualifying any violator of the two-child norm from contesting panchayat poll.

Holding that the law was passed by the state in national interest because the problem of burgeoning population was a major hindrance in the socio-economic progress of the country, a three-Judge Bench, headed by Mr Justice R. C. Lahoti said it did not violate any fundamental right of the citizen.

Putting its seal of approval on the legality of Section 175(1) of the Haryana Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, disqualifying a person with more than two living children from contesting elections to the panchayats, block samitis and zila parishads, the Bench having Mr Justice Ashok Bhan and Mr Justice Arun Kumar as other judges, said, “In our view, the disqualification... does not contravene any fundamental right, nor does it cross the limit of reasonability. Rather, it is a disqualification conceptually devised in the national interest.”

Dismissing the petitions by more than 200 panchayat members and pradhans from the state, challenging the validity of Section 175(1) of the Act, the court said a sharp rise in country’s population was a major concern for everyone and “provide justification for priority in policy- oriented legislation whenever needed.”

Going a step further, the court said even if a person had given away the third or fourth child in adoption to some other persons to save himself from being disqualified for contesting the panchayat polls, he could not claim the benefit of being not covered under the law.

The court further said the law could not also be challenged on any religious grounds, saying, “No religious scripture or authority had been brought to its notice which provided that marrying less than four women or abstaining from procreating a child from each wife in case of permitted bigamy or polygamy would be irreligious or offensive to the dictates of the religion.”

Some Muslim panchayat functionaries had challenged the validity of the Act on the ground that such a bar was against the religious practice in their faith.

In the case of twins, the court said though it was an exception, the “exceptions do not make rule nor render the rule irrelevant. Validity of the law cannot be testified by abnormal situations.”

Stating that none of the petitioners had questioned the legislative competence of the state Assembly to enact the law, the court said, “The impugned provision is neither arbitrary, nor unreasonable nor discriminatory.”