Read Time: 06 minutes
Equality of opportunity is but one facet of gender equality. Equality of recognition is just as important. Just as a daughter and son are equally entitled to recognition as the children of a couple, the mother and father are also equally entitled to recognition as parents of the child, said the court
The Delhi High Court held that using only the father’s name in official documents of children is an archaic and unrealistic notion of gender difference. Court further held that mothers and fathers have the right of equal recognition and therefore both their names must be recorded in official documents mandating the same.
The bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar held, “Equality of opportunity is but one facet of gender equality. Equality of recognition is just as important. Just as a daughter and son are equally entitled to recognition as the children of a couple, the mother and father are also equally entitled to recognition as parents of the child. To even question, much less deny, this, would be redolent, again, of an archaic and unrealistic notion of gender difference, which is a notion that has clearly outstayed its welcome”.
The petitioner completed a 5-year B.A. LLB course at Amity Law School, which was affiliated with Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (University). However, her degree only displayed her father's name and not her mother's. She argued that this violates principles of gender equality and personal choice in identification.
Court expressed pride and joy in observing that a significant number of young lawyers, including the petitioner, are women. Furthermore, court noted with satisfaction that a majority of law school graduates today are also women. The bench emphasized that segregating individuals based on sex or gender is outdated and inappropriate. The bench suggested that any lingering biases based on such distinctions should be acknowledged and overcome.
Court allowed the arguments of the petitioner that there was no logical reason to include only the father's name on educational certificates. It deemed it regressive for certificates to omit the mother's name, emphasizing that both parents' names should be included on such documents.
It further added, “The Court, therefore, simplifies the task of the officials in the University by issuing categorical directions that, in future, every document relating to the students in which the name of the parents of the student is to be mentioned, would reflect the name of both the father and mother of the concerned student. This shall be treated as mandatory and non-negotiable”.
The bench further noted that the format specified in the Circular dated 6 June 2014 for mentioning the names of students and their parents was unnecessarily confusing and suggested a simpler approach, such as using "Mrs/Ms" and "Mr" instead. Additionally, the court questioned the inclusion of the student's father's father, mother's husband, or mother's father in the document, as it seems unclear and unnecessary. Court directed compliance with the circular regarding including the names of the student's parents on educational certificates but left the decision on the format to the University.
Accordingly, court directed the university to record the name of the petitioner's mother in her official degree within 2 weeks from the date of the order.
Case Title: Ritika Prasad v Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University
Please Login or Register
