Moot problem

Mayank (Querist) 16 August 2017 This query is : Resolved
Matrubhumi is a federal democratic republic with Rule of Law, Independent Judiciary, Free Media and Vibrant Civil Society. The Constitutional and Legal System of Matrubhumi is identical to that of “Union of India”. Dakshina Ratna is one of the southern States under the Union of Matrubhumi, having its own Legislative Assembly.

One Mr. Subramanian Sharma, passed M.A.S. (Matrubhumi Administrative Service) examination conducted by M.P.S.C. (Matrubhumi Public Service Commission). After the mandatory training at the ‘Academy of Administration’, in January 2014, he was appointed as Sub Divisional Magistrate (Tahsildar) at Kanaka Puram, which is one of the largest cities of Dakshina Ratna. Subsequently, he married to one Ms. Latha Karve on 1 April, 2014 as per the requirements of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

One day, Mr. Subramanian Sharma accidently met with his old Muslim friend, Ms. Sultana Bhutto. They started meeting frequently thereafter. Their intimacy increased to such an extent that they fell in love with each other and they decided to get married. Mr. Subramanian Sharma then converted to Islam. Without divorcing his first Hindu wife, Mrs. Latha, he married Ms. Sultana Bhutto as per the Muslim Personal Law on 1 April, 2015. He did not seek a prior permission from the Government before contracting this second marriage as required under the Proviso (a) to Rule 19 (2) of the All Matrubumi Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968.

On 15 April, 2015, Mrs. Latha Sharma filed a criminal complaint with the police under Section 494 of the M.P.C. (Matrubhumi Penal Code) accusing her husband of bigamy. On the same day, she also informed about the second marriage contracted by her husband to the Government of Dakshaina Ratna and Government of Matrubhumi.

Subsequently, after a fair inquiry conducted by the Government, on 2 January, 2016, the Matrubhumi Government dismissed Mr. Subramanian Sharma from service, under Rule 19 (2) of the All Matrubumi Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968.

Mr. Subramanian Sharma then challenged the decision of the Government, to dismiss him, before the High Court of Rajdhani (Capital State of Matrubhumi). He challenged the validity of the order on the ground that it was Ultra Vires the

1

Rule 19 and alternatively, he also challenged the Constitutional validity of the Rule 19 as violative of his freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of Matrubhumi. On behalf of Mr. Subramanian Sharma, it was argued that polygamy was an integral part of religion of Islam and it could be claimed as part of the freedom of religion.

The Government of Matrubhumi contended before the High Court that the second marriage contracted by the petitioner, after converting to Islam and without dissolving first marriage under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, was a fraud played on the Muslim Personal Law, Hindu Marriage Act and Rule 19 of the All Matrubumi Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968. The Government argued that polygamy, although permitted by the Muslim Personal Law, is not an “essential religious practice” under Islam. The Government also argued that polygamy violates the fundamental right under Article 14 and 15 (1) of the Constitution of Matrubhumi. The petitioner Mr. Sharma counter-argued that un-codified Muslim Personal Law was immune from the application of fundamental rights under Articles 14 & 15 (1).

On 6 August, 2017, the High Court of Rajdhani upheld the dismissal of the petitioner from the Government service and also directed the Government of Matrubhumi to introduce, within a year, a bill to bring Uniform Civil Code, as mandated under Article 44 of the Constitution of Matrubhumi. The High Court also declared the practice of Polygamy, permitted under the Muslim Personal Law, as unconstitutional.

Mr. Subramanian Sharma (Appellant) filed an appeal against the decision of High Court of Rajdhani in the Supreme Court of Matrubhumi. The Government of Matrubhumi (Respondent) filed its reply in response to the Supreme Court’s notice. The matter is fixed for hearing and arguments on 3 September, 2017.

please help me with this moot problem as appllent and respondant .

Follow Query

Report Abuse