Read Time: 05 minutes
The bench was hearing a plea filed by a Khasi tribe woman who was asked to leave the Delhi Golf club due to her facial appearance and attire.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday appointed Senior Advocate V Giri as Amicus Curiae to examine the wider issue of prevailing discriminatory practices in the society in a plea filed by a Khasi Tribe woman who was denied entry at the Golf Club due to her traditional attire.
A bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad observed that discrimination on the basis of place of birth would attract article 15(2) of the Constitution.
Advocate Vrinda Grover appeared for the woman and while referring to the bye-laws submitted by the Golf Club she submitted that they have now amended the bye-laws to entrench the discrimination further.
Grover submitted that their amended bye-laws specifically say that Domestic Employees cannot be signed in as guests.
Thereafter, the bench said they would like to examine the implementation of Article 15(2) and the wider issue of prevailing discriminatory practices in society, and for that purpose Sr. Adv. V. Giri was appointed as Amicus in the matter. The bench listed the matter for further hearing on January 20, 2023.
The petition has been filed by a woman of Khasi origin from the state of Meghalaya belonging to a Scheduled Tribe, who was denied the right to be a guest at a lunch she was invited to at Delhi Golf Club Limited's dining area because of her facial appearance and her cultural attire.
The plea stated that "her facial appearance and cultural attire, 'which in the wisdom of the Golf Club was an expression of her being a Nepali maid', and that in itself disqualified her from her right to be a duly invited guest at the lunch".
The plea sought direction to ensure that discrimination on the basis of caste, sex, place of birth, cultural attire and expression, occupation, etc., which is an insult to and violative of one's right to human dignity, is not allowed to perpetuate in the garb of rules, regulations, bye-laws, etc., of places of public resort and entertainment.
Additionally, it also sought direction to ensure that places maintained or established out-of-state funds or beneficiaries of monetary concessions from the state are required by the Union of India to uphold the constitutional values of equality, fraternity, and justice social.
Case Title: Kong Tallin Lyngdoh & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Please Login or Register
