Government Criticism of the Centre for Taking Extreme Action Against Opposition-Ruled States
The Supreme Court reprimanded the Centre for not implementing the constitutional requirement that women in Nagaland have a 33% quota in municipal authorities. The central government was said to have taken “extreme measures against states which are not amenable to it” but had not done the same for states where the dominant political party was in power.
The judges Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia expressed displeasure that the state had not implemented the 1992 constitutional amendment and said that the “Centre could not wash its hands off.” The court also said that although comparable political regimes in other states were not subject to the same measures by the Centre as those in opposition-governed states.
The bench reportedly asked the Center, “What are you doing? “, according to a TOI story. You cannot claim that you and them are on different political wavelengths since both countries operate under the same political system. Please do not force us to claim that the Center is not carrying out the Constitution. To guarantee that it is put into practice, you must take an active part. You belong to the same political era. You take drastic measures against other nations that don’t cooperate with you, but you don’t do the same for governments under the same system.
The central government cannot ignore the problem, they said. The fact that the political climate in the state and the federal government is consistent makes its job easier. I’m giving you (state) one final chance.”
In order to obey the ruling, additional solicitor general K M Nataraj, who was representing the Center, has requested some time. According to reports, the ASG also requested three months because of the unfavorable conditions in Manipur.
According to reports, the Supreme Court bench has set a deadline of September 26 for the Center and State to execute the constitutional requirement. On the other side, the Naga groups are opposed to the aforementioned clause because, as alleged by the two governments, it interferes with Naga tradition and customary practice.
The court went on to say that compared to war-torn Manipur, which has been dealing with ethnic conflict for a few months now, the situation in Nagaland is far better. According to reports, Justice Kaul observed, “What is occurring is really distressing. I’m holding back from saying anything more because I know it won’t sit well with you, according to TOI.
The court noted that Nagaland is a state where women participate actively and have high levels of education and status. The denial of women’s reservation in municipal government is therefore not justified. Additionally, they noted that the coalition administration headed by the Bharatiya Janata Party in Nagaland may make it simpler for the Center to implement the provision in the state.
