YOU may hail from a royal household, be a raja or a nawab – however these titles can’t be utilized in constitutional courts and public workplaces, in response to a latest ruling of the Rajasthan Excessive Courtroom.

The court docket has held that the usage of salutations and titles reminiscent of “Raja”, “Nawab” and “Rajkumar” in constitutional courts, different courts, tribunals, and public workplaces of the State is prohibited when it comes to Articles 14 (proper to equality), 18 (abolition of titles), and 363A (abolition of privy purses) of the Structure.

“Within the mild of above, this Courtroom holds that in Constitutional Courts, all different Courts, Tribunals, public workplaces of the State and so forth., the usage of salutation and titles is prohibited when it comes to Articles 14, 18 and 363A of the Structure of India. The mentioned restriction will even apply within the public area in addition to public paperwork & public workplaces.”

The matter got here to Justice Sameer Jain’s consideration after it famous {that a} respondent within the cause-title of a petition was addressed as “Raja Laxman Singh”.

Counting on constitutional provisions, the court docket identified that any title awarded to the citizen of India by a International State can’t be accepted or used.

The Courtroom additionally referred to the regulation laid down by the Supreme Courtroom in its judgments in Raghunath Ganpatrao vs. Union of India (1993) and Balaji Raghavan/S.P. Anand vs. Union of India (1995) to look at that as per Article 363A, titles reminiscent of ‘Raja’ and ‘Nawab’ battle with the ideas of equality.

The Supreme Courtroom noticed in Balaji Raghavan as follows in Paragraph 31:

“Hereditary titles of the Aristocracy battle with the precept of equality insofar as they create a separate, identifiable class of people who find themselves distinct from the remainder of society and have entry to particular privileges. Titles that aren’t hereditary however carry suffixes or prefixes have the identical impact, although, the diploma could also be lesser. Whereas different Constitutions additionally prohibit the conferment of titles of the Aristocracy, ours might maybe be distinctive in requiring that awards conferred by the State will not be for use as suffixes or prefixes. This distinction is borne out of the peculiar issues that these titles had created in pre-independent India and the earnest want of the framers to forestall the repetition of those circumstances in Free, Impartial India.”

The counsel knowledgeable the Excessive Courtroom that “the Supreme Courtroom has upheld the validity of twenty sixth Modification and Article 363A of the Structure and has imposed prohibition on the conferment of titles of the Aristocracy and the heredity titles of the Aristocracy as the identical are in battle with the ideas of equality”. When it comes to Article 363A of the Structure, the hereditary titles of the Aristocracy being in battle with the ideas of equality and opposite to Article 14 of the Structure of India can’t be used as prefixes or suffixes, the Excessive Courtroom held.

Whereas passing the course, the court docket famous that the events had not objected to the prohibition of titles within the public area and in courts.

Justice Jain then proceeded to direct the petitioners to amend the trigger title.

Throughout a earlier listening to in January, the court docket had requested the Union in addition to the state authorities to reply on a restricted problem – can titles reminiscent of ‘Raja’, ‘Nawab’, ‘Maharaja’, ‘Rajkumar’ be used as prefixes earlier than courts put up the insertion of the twenty sixth Constitutional Modification?

Earlier than the excessive court docket, Advocate Normal M.S. Singhvi, showing for the state, mentioned that the federal government does endorse the view that the usage of prefixes and suffixes, apart from any navy or tutorial distinction, are abolished and due to this fact, violative of Article 14.

He additionally submitted that the identical can’t be utilized in public workplaces, constitutional courts, or in public domains, although the state has respect for the contribution and the general public welfare, philanthropy provided by the royal households previously.

The court docket directed the circulation of the order to the workplaces of the state Advocate Normal, Further Solicitor Normal of the Union of India, Registrar Normal of the Excessive Courtroom and the state authorities for obligatory motion.

Click on right here to see the Rajasthan Excessive Courtroom’s order.

Supply hyperlink