The Supreme Court Today (August 2nd) rejected the appeals filed against the decision of the Maharashtra State authorities to rename city and revenue divisions of Aurangabad and Osmanabad as Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv respectively.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed appeals challenging the decision of the Maharashtra State authorities to rename the city and revenue divisions of Aurangabad and Osmanabad to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and Dharashiv, respectively.
A Bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti upheld the Bombay High Court’s ruling on the matter, describing the High Court’s decision as well reasoned. The Bench noted that different individuals would have varied perspectives on such issues, and it is not within the Court’s purview to address these through judicial review.
“Should courts solve it by judicial review? If they have power to name and rename. It is a reasoned order (of the Bombay High Court). Why should it be faulted,”
-the Court queried.
The Bombay High Court had, in May, dismissed petitions challenging the renaming of the cities.
The previous Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government, under Uddhav Thackeray, decided to rename both Aurangabad and Osmanabad in its cabinet meeting on June 29, 2021.
Aurangabad was renamed ‘Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar‘ while Osmanabad was renamed ‘Dharashiv‘.
The new government, led by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, reaffirmed the MVA government’s decision on July 16, 2022.
Subsequent to this reaffirmation, a series of petitions were filed before the High Court by individuals, including residents of the respective districts. The Maharashtra government argued that renaming ‘Osmanabad’ to ‘Dharashiv’ did not incite religious or communal hatred nor did it cause any rift between religious groups.
The High Court’s rejection of these petitions led to the appeal before the Supreme Court. Advocate SB Talekar, representing the petitioners, contended that the procedure prescribed under relevant rules was not followed.
“There was no draft notification here inviting objections and suggestions. So procedure under Maharashtra land revenue code. There was no alteration of territorial boundaries,”
–he argued.
CASE TITLE:
Shaikh Masud Ismail Shaikh and ors v Union of India and ors.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports of Supreme Court
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
