Why Calcutta High Court imposed Rs 10k costs on man over his plea for appointment as Muslim marriage registrar

Background

• The petitioner had filed a writ petition before the single bench of the Calcutta High Court submitting that his father is incapacitated by reason of a hearing disability.
• He, therefore, prayed that the said post be given to him on compassionate grounds.
• His plea was dismissed by the single judge on the ground that he did not possess the qualifications required for appointment as MMR under the government notification dated June 28, 2000.
• Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the single judge, he filed an appeal before a division bench of the court.

Findings

• Admittedly, the petitioner is neither a Fazil nor Alim (scholar) in terms of Rule 4 of the government notification dated June 28, 2000.
• Rule 5 prescribes that the persons without the aforesaid qualification of Fazil and Alim must have sufficient knowledge of Arabic and the Mohammedan Law of marriage and divorce.
• The single judge found that the certificate produced by the appellant did not indicate that he had sufficient knowledge of Arabic or Mohammedan Law of marriage and divorce.
• The single judge, therefore, refused to exercise discretionary relief under Article 226 (power of high courts to issue certain writs) of the Constitution of India to interfere with the order rejecting the prayer of the appellant for appointment of MMR on compassionate appointment.
• What is more baffling is that the medical certificate of his father indicates 45 per cent of hearing disability.
• It was further indicated that the hearing may improve with the passage of time.
• Admittedly, the father’s certification as MMR by the state has not yet been revoked. It is not understood under what authority or entitlement in law the petitioner could claim that his father’s MMR registration certificate has been revoked by the state.
• The order passed by the single judge of this court calls for no interference.