‘Important issue’, SC seeks views of parties for 33% women reservation in Parliament, Assemblies

The Supreme Court on Friday said it is keen to know the stand of all political parties as it asked the Centre why it is not responding to a PIL for re-introduction of the Women's Reservation Bill, 2008 that reserves 33 % seats for women in the Lok Sabha and all state legislative assemblies.

The court said none of the parties  have come forward, except Communist Party of India (Marxist) to clarify their stand.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S V N Bhatti told Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, representing the Centre, “You have not filed a reply. Why are you shying away?” 

The Centre’s counsel said the petitioner is seeking a mandamus to table this, Bill.

“That's separate…..Then say you want to implement it. Why don't you file a reply? It's too important an issue. It concerns all of us”.

The court was hearing a PIL by National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW).

The bench told Nataraj, “you should have filed a reply….I was interested to know what political parties would say. None of them have come forward, except CPI (M)”.

The bench fixed the matter for further hearing in October 2023.

  Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for NFIW. 

In November, 2022, the top court had sought a response from the central government on PIL seeking the revival of the ‘Women’s Reservation Bill’ that lapsed in Parliament eight years ago.

The top court then directed the Centre to file a response within six weeks and gave three additional weeks to the petitioner to respond to the affidavit to be filed by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

The PIL said, “Patriarchal mindset of our society has led to the oppression of women denying them their rightful status as equals. This can only be changed if women are placed in positions of authority to effectively bring about such alterations”.

The plea submitted that it has been 25 years since the first Women’s Reservation Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1996. The plea argued that it is further pertinent to note that the Bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha in 2010 as the Constitution (One Hundred & Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2008, however the same lapsed in 2014 after the dissolution of the 15th Lok Sabha. “It is submitted that the instant Bill was not placed before the Lok Sabha despite having been passed by the Rajya Sabha in 2010. Such omission by the Respondent of not placing a piece of beneficial legislation before the Lok Sabha after the same has been passed by the Rajya Sabha and not allowing the same to be given due consideration, is absolutely arbitrary,” the plea said.