THE CONTEXT: For most Indian families, a home of their own is a dream of a lifetime, promising security, belonging, and a sense of community. However, this dream turned sour for a 44-year-old Muslim woman employee who was allotted an apartment in Vadodara under a government housing scheme. Residents have complained and demanded her allotment be revoked, citing her religion and the possibility of “threat and nuisance.”
THE ISSUES:
Discrimination Based on Religion: The allotment of the flat to the Muslim woman has been met with protests and demands for revocation from residents of the housing society solely on the grounds of her religion. This blatant discrimination violates the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 14 and 15 of the Indian Constitution, which prohibit discrimination based on religion.
Spatial Segregation and Marginalization: There has been a long-standing issue of spatial segregation based on religion or community in Gujarat, particularly in urban centers like Vadodara and Ahmedabad. The Disturbed Areas Act, initially introduced to curb the distress sale of properties, has been amended over time with stringent provisions that have deepened social fault lines and marginalized minorities.
Violation of Constitutional Rights: The protests against the Muslim woman’s allotment and the demands for its revocation threaten to erode her constitutional rights to equality before the law and non-discrimination based on religion. The authorities, including the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC), uphold and protect these fundamental rights.
Prejudice and Intolerance: There is a prevalence of extreme prejudice and intolerance towards the “other” community, as evidenced by the residents’ objections to living in the same neighborhood as the Muslim woman. This prejudice stems from a deep-rooted suspicion and unwillingness to share common spaces with those perceived as different.
Role of Authorities and the State: The role of authorities, such as the VMC and the state government, in addressing and countering such instances of discrimination and prejudice is questionable. It emphasizes the need for these entities to take a firm stand in defending the equal rights of all citizens, regardless of their religion or community, and upholding the principles enshrined in the Constitution.
THE WAY FORWARD:
Enact a comprehensive anti-discrimination law: The Sachar Committee (2006) recommended providing a legal mechanism to address complaints of discrimination against minorities in employment, housing, schooling, and obtaining bank loans. A law prohibiting discrimination in housing based on religion, caste, gender, etc., and providing robust enforcement mechanisms would be a crucial step.
Establish an Equal Opportunity Commission: The Sachar Committee also recommended setting up an Equal Opportunity Commission to investigate grievances of deprived groups like minorities. A statutory body could investigate housing discrimination cases, issue orders, and impose penalties. The Supreme Court in Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karamchari Sangh v. Union of India (1981) held that the government must protect the rights of minorities.
Amend the Real Estate Regulation Act (RERA): Amending RERA explicitly prohibiting discrimination by builders, housing societies, and real estate agents based on religion, caste, gender, etc., could help address housing discrimination. As per Article 15(2), the state can make special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes, including provisions against discrimination in housing.
Strict implementation of Article 15: Article 15 prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. The Supreme Court in Zoroastrian Cooperative Housing Society v. District Registrar (2005) failed to apply this provision to housing societies. However, the Indian Medical Association v. Union of India (2011) held that the right against discrimination under Article 15(2)(a) would apply to housing transactions. Strict implementation of Article 15 is crucial.
Public awareness and community initiatives: The Kundu Committee (2014) post-Sachar evaluation stressed strengthening community institutions to enable marginalized groups to access government programs. Public awareness campaigns highlighting constitutional values of equality and initiatives promoting inter-community interactions could help combat prejudices leading to housing discrimination.
THE CONCLUSION:
When personal prejudice threatens to corrode constitutional rights, all concerned authorities — and the state — must come forward and protect them. This is a test to defend the equal rights of every citizen without fear, favor, or prejudice. The VMC must read the law and the Constitution, upholding the principles of equality before the law and non-discrimination enshrined in Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Indian Constitution.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTIONS:
Q.1 Right of movement and residence throughout the territory of India are freely available to the Indian citizens, but these rights are not absolute. Comment 2022
Q.2 Discuss the impact of the post-liberal economy on ethnic identity and communalism.2023
Q.3 Are tolerance, assimilation, and pluralism the key elements in the making of an Indian form of secularism? Justify your answer.2022
Q.4 Communalism arises either due to power struggle or relative deprivation. Argue by giving suitable illustrations. 2018
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q.1 Discuss the constitutional provisions that guarantee equality and prohibit discrimination. Examine the administrative authorities’ role in upholding these rights when faced with societal prejudices.
SOURCE:
Spread the Word