Absolutely Atrocious Provision: Apex Court Asks UP Govt To Explain Propriety And Legality Of A Regulation Providing For Appointment Of District Magistrate's Wife To Prime Post

The Supreme Court was shocked to notice on Monday, a peculiar regulation from Uttar Pradesh mandating that the wife of the District Magistrate (DM) should serve as the President of registered societies in a district. The Court termed the norm "atrocious" and "humiliating for all women in the state" and asked the State to file an affidavit on the same. 

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan questioned the State of UP on the propriety and legality of Clause 3(5)(b)(1) of Zila Mahila Samiti of Bulandshahar, whereunder, only the wife of the District Magistrate is required to be appointed as the President of the Society.

The Court noticed the regulation while hearing a case, when Justice Kant said, "Mrs. District Magistrate, look at the way..."

Justice Viswanathan then asked, "What happens if the District Magistrate is a lady?"

The Counsel appearing for the President District Women Association, Bulandshahar, in the case replied that in such an event, the lady District Magistrate will herself become the President.  "Where is the provision contemplating a lady District Magistrate?", Justice Viswanathan asked.

Justice Kant responded, "There is none." The Counsel also could not point out such a provision. 

"You are assuming that the District Magistrate is always a man," Justice Viswanathan then said.

The Court also expressed shock that the regulation provides for the District Magistrate to nominate someone if he does not have a wife.

While expressing shock, Justice Viswanathan said, "If the District Magistrate is a lady IAS officer, what happens? Never seen something like this, Mrs. District Magistrate in a by-law."

"We have to write something on this and we will write something harsh on it. This is an absolutely atrocious provision", Justice Surya Kant remarked.

"You are not elected, you are not selected, you are just nominated because you happen to be the wife of a District Magistrate", Justice Surya Kant added.

The Counsel appearing for the District Women Association attempted to justify the regulation by citing the need to safeguard government lands. However, the Court dismissed this argument, emphasizing that there are numerous alternative methods available to protect government interests without resorting to the appointment of spouses. The Court said, "There are a hundred other ways to protect rights. Government can lay down a uniform policy for that."

The Bench then granted two weeks to the State's counsel to file an affidavit on the "propriety and legality" of the regulation.

The case pertains to Bulandshahr's Zila Mahila Samiti, which has been operating since 1957 with a mandate to work for the welfare of widows, orphans, and other marginalized women. Despite attempts by the Samiti to amend its bye-laws in 2022, the regulation requiring the DM's wife to serve as president persisted, prompting legal challenges that eventually reached the Apex Court.

The matter has been adjourned to July 23. 

Cause Title: CM Zila Mahila Samiti v. State of U.P. [SLP(C) No. 17018/2023]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Subodh Markandeya, AoR Mohd. Waquas