← Library
Madras High CourtWP/26183/2018dismissed as withdrawal

S.Husssain Afroze v. The Union Of India

2019-02-04Honourable Mr Justice S. Manikumar,Honourable Mr Justice Subramonium Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 04/02/2019 C O R A M THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD Writ Petition No.26183 of 2018 and M.P.No.30409 of 2018 S. Hussain Afroze

...Petitioner

Vs The Union of India rep. By its Secretary Ministry of Law & Justice 4th Floor, A Wing Shastri Bhawan,New Delhi.

...Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of declaration to declare Clause 4 to 7 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, 2018; Ordinance No.7 of 2018, as ultra vires of the Constitution of India.

For petitioner ... Mr.T.Mahendiran For respondents ... Mr.G.Rajagopalan Additional Solicitor General of India - - - - - -

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J) Instant Public Interest Litigation has been filed, seeking for a declaration, to declare Clause 4 to 7 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, 2018; Ordinance No.7 of 2018, as ultra vires of the Constitution of India.

2. On 5/10/2018, we passed the following order:- "Provisions 4 to 7 Presidential Ordinance No.7 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, 2018, are challenged on the grounds inter alia that the said provisions are violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India. That apart, averments is also made that when pronouncement of triple talak is otiose and does not inflict any legal injury, such pronouncement has been made as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

crime punishable with imprisonment for the period upto three years, besides fine.

2. Mr.S.Thiruvenkadam, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the respondent submitted that he would get instructions, within two weeks from today.

3. Question of granting suitable interim orders, would be considered on the next hearing date.

4. Post on 22/10/2018, in the motion list."

3. Mr.G.Rajagopalan, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, appearing on behalf of Union of India, submitted that duration of the impugned ordinance has expired. Government of India has passed a new Ordinance. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, 2019 and published the same, in the Gazette of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, dated 12th January 2019.

4. In view of the above, impugned ordinance does not survive.

5. Mr.T.Mahendiran, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that writ petition may be dismissed as withdrawn and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.

6. Placing on record the above, writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition No.30409 of 2018 is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mvs.

To The Secretary Union of India Ministry of Law & Justice 4th Floor, A Wing Shastri Bhawan,New Delhi.

Writ Petition No.26183 of 2018 and M.P.No.30409 of 2018 KJI(CO) rrs 28/02/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/