Website of Justice Dept shows tremendous work done for sensitizing citizens about Art 51-A:AG to SC

PTI, Apr 4, 2022, 5:55 PM IST

Attorney General K K Venugopal on Monday told the Supreme Court that he has an objection to the petition, seeking direction for enacting well-defined laws/rules to ensure adherence to the fundamental duties as enshrined in the Constitution, as the website of the Department of Justice shows the “tremendous amount of work” which has been done for sensitizing citizens about Article 51-A.

Venugopal, who was earlier asked by the top court to assist in the matter, told a bench of Justices S K Kaul and M M Sundresh that the curriculum of schools contains Article 51-A with duties to be taught to the students and debates have been held throughout the country.

Article 51-A of the Constitution deals with fundamental duties.

While the Attorney General said the President and Prime Minister have addressed this aspect and a one-year awareness drive was also launched, the Centre told the bench that it would file an affidavit in the matter and was granted four weeks for the purpose.

The bench told Venugopal that it was circumspect while issuing notice on the plea and the court only wanted to know about the limited issue.

It said the court, in its earlier order, had said that government may inform it as to whether any steps have been taken in pursuance to one of its earlier judgement or do it propose to take any steps in furtherance thereof.

In its February 21 order, the apex court had noted that the counsel appearing for the petitioner had said that he was emphasizing two of the prayers made in the plea taking into consideration the observations made by the top court in the 2003 judgement.

In that verdict, the apex court had directed the Centre to consider and take appropriate steps expeditiously for implementation of recommendations of the report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, wherein a report made by a committee on the operationalization of the fundamental duties of citizens was accepted and the strong suggestion was made for its early implementation.

During the hearing on Monday, Venugopal said it has been elaborately set out on the website of the Ministry of Justice and there is a duty on the part of a PIL petitioner to first investigate and then come forward.

“Why don’t you place an affidavit on record,” the bench said.

Venugopal said the court may ask the Union of India to file an affidavit as he is appearing as the Attorney General in the matter.

An advocate appearing in the matter told the bench that he is being led by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who is representing the Centre in the matter. “We will take instructions and file a response,” the lawyer said.

Venugopal referred to two of the prayers, including the one which seeks direction to the Centre and states to make comprehensive well-defined laws/rules ensuring the adherence to the provisions of Part IV-A of the Constitution effectively and requiring the citizens to perform their fundamental duties properly, and said such prayers will not lie.

“That is why we had asked that the government may inform as to whether any steps have been taken in pursuance to the judgement or if it proposes to take steps,” the bench said.

The top court noted in the order that the Attorney General has stated that a huge amount of material is there on the website itself which would have given answers to the questions that the petitioner is seeking to pose.

The bench also noted that the counsel, who entered an appearance on behalf of the Centre, has informed that the Solicitor General would be appearing in the matter and the government would like to place an affidavit.

It said the needful be done within four weeks.

The bench said some of the states, which have entered appearance before it, can file their counter affidavit if they desire.

The apex court posted the matter for further hearing in July. The plea, filed by an advocate, has sought the issuance of directives ensuring adherence to the mandates as postulated under Part IV-A of the Constitution and said that non-adherence to them has a direct bearing on the exercise and enjoyment of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19, 21 for formulation and operationalization of appropriate scheme providing incentives to the citizenry for their adherence.

“Moreover, it may be just and appropriate for this court to frame guidelines for regulation and effective implementation for fundamental duties in the exercise of the plenary and extra-ordinary power of this court under Article 32 and 142 of the Constitution until the scheme in this regard is formalised by the respondents,” the plea said.

It said the fundamental duties are intended to serve as a constant reminder to every citizen that while the Constitution conferred on them certain fundamental rights specifically, it also requires citizens to observe certain basic norms of democratic conduct and behaviour because rights and duties are correlative.

The plea further added that except for some scattered legislations, there is neither a uniform policy nor a comprehensive code for enforcement of fundamental duties.

It has sought directions from the Centre and states for framing of guidelines for taking appropriate steps to sensitize people and spread general awareness among the citizens concerning the performance of fundamental duties under the Constitution.