The Madhya Pradesh High Court criticized the central government for a prolonged ban on officials associating with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), highlighting it took nearly 50 years to rectify this mistake. The court’s remarks came while hearing a petition filed by retired central government officer Purushottam Gupta, who argued that the ban hindered his post-retirement aspirations.
The petition was filed in September 2023 by Gupta, represented by lawyer Manish Nair. The court noted the central government’s delay in addressing the issue, emphasizing the case had been pending for 10 months without a reply from the Union of India. The government finally issued a notification lifting the ban, with an affidavit submitted on July 10.
A bench of Justices S A Dharmadhikari and Gajendra Singh expressed disappointment, stating the ban had unjustly curtailed the aspirations of many government employees who wished to serve the country through the RSS. The court lamented that it took so long for the government to recognize the RSS as an internationally renowned organization wrongly categorized as political.
The court criticized the lack of evidence or studies justifying the original ban, which painted even the RSS’s apolitical activities as communal and anti-secular. The judges emphasized that decisions infringing on fundamental rights must be based on substantial evidence and data.
Highlighting the RSS’s significant role in non-political community service, the court mentioned its affiliates like Rashtriya Seva Bharti and Saraswati Shishu Mandirs, which contribute to social, educational, and philanthropic activities. The court stated that voluntary membership in such activities should not be restricted by executive orders but should be governed by duly enacted laws if deemed necessary.
The bench concluded by advising that any future decisions regarding the RSS should involve intensive deliberation and be backed by persuasive evidence, ensuring the ban’s profound impact on the organization and its members is thoroughly considered.
Comments