A bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and C. T. Ravikumar sought response from the Respondents on the plea praying to issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to notify the rules under the Anand Marriage Act 1909 in the country as expeditiously as possible in the interest of justice.
The petitioner apprised the Court that he had also filed a writ petition before the High Court of Uttarakhand seeking formulation of the rules. The matter was finally disposed off by the High Court by an order dated 23rd March 2021 with a direction of the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttarakhand "to take appropriate steps for putting the aforesaid proposal before the cabinet and after approval of the cabinet also take steps for publishing the same in the Gazette and place it before the Legislative Assembly."
The petition submitted that various States and Union Territories have already framed the rules for registration of sikh marriages under the Anand Marriage Act, 1909 but still various States and Union Territories have yet, not notified the said rules as mandated by Section 6 of the Anand Marriage Act, 1909.
The petition filed by Petitioner Advocate Amanjot Singh Chaddha submitted that, "India being a secular democracy has to uphold and respect the religious practices of its citizens. Anand Marriage Act, 1909 was enacted by the Imperial Legislative Council over more than a century ago to give legal sanction to a Marriage ceremony among Sikhs known as Anand Karaj and also to remove any doubts, which may be cast as to their validity."
The petitioner had stated in the petition that, "this is a classic case of inaction by the Respondents and their lethargy to even perform basic functions as provided under the law." It was also stated that "taking into account the difficulties arising due to the inaction of the State Governments in formulating the rules for the implementation of the said Act, a large section of the society is being disenfranchised from availing of the fruits of a Central Act."
The petition has arrayed the Union of India, the States of Uttarkhand, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Gujarat, Bihar, Maharashtra, Telangana, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, Arunahcal Pradesh, Goa, Manipur and Uniion Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Let & Ladakh, Chandigarh, Lakshadweep, Daman & Diu, Pondicherry and Andaman & Nicobar as the respondents.
The petitioner was represented by Advocate, Mr. Sanpreet Singh Ajmani.
Case Title: Amanjot Singh Chaddha vs Union of India - W. P. (C) No. 911/2022