# Ashish Kumar Misra [P.I.L.] v. Bharat Sarkar

- **Citation:** (2015) 2 ILRA 510
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2015-04-15
- **Case number:** Misc. Bench No. 2993 of 2015
- **Bench:** Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, C.J. Shri Narayan Shukla
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/ashish-kumar-misra-p-i-l-v-bharat-sarkar-43228
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

National Food Security Act 2013-Section13-Issue of Ration Card-with name of
eldest woman of family-apprehensionwhere no major women-by clause 2 of
section 13 itself clarify the situation-so
far
discrimination
with
transgender
concern-within purview of legislating
body-to enact suitable provisions-effort
of counsel raising public interest-duly
appreciated.
Held: Para-6
The object and purpose of Section 13 of
the Act was to bring about a sense of
empowerment for women. The purpose
of enacting Section 13 of the Act was to
recognize the status of a woman in every
household and it was in that context that
the statute has enacted that the head of
the household would be deemed to be
eldest woman member who is above the
age of eighteen. The recognition of the
eldest woman as the head of the
household is in contradistinction to a
male member since as we have already
noted above, sub-section (2) of Section 13
2 All] Ashish Kumar Misra [P.I.L.] Vs. Bharat Sarkar
511
of the Act enables a male member of the
household to be recognized as the head of
the household only in the absence of a
woman or if the sole woman is below the
age of eighteen, until she attains the age
of majority. The object and purpose of
Section 13 of the Act in other words was
not to exclude transgenders though in
view of the judgment of the Supreme
Court in National Legal Services Authority
(supra)
Parliament
may,
if
we
may
respectfully
so
say,
consider
the
appropriateness of a suitable provision to
meet the situation. This is entirely within
the purview of the legislating body and a
matter which lies in the province of the
enacting authority. The salutary public
purpose, underlying the enactment of
Section 13 of the Act can be furthered by
incorporating
a
situation
where
a
transgender can be recognized as a head
of an eligible household.

## Text

510
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
cement factory will be established on the
land in question, whereas except that
complaint there is no evidence on record,
which establishes that the petitioner
intends to establish a cement factory. It is
settled legal position that stamp duty is to
be paid on the basis of the use of the land
at the time of registration of document
and no inference can be drawn for
changing the nature of the land in future
by the purchaser.
33. Thus, the legal position is that
the market value of the land cannot be
determined with reference to the use of
the land to which buyer intends to put it.
The market value is what a general buyer
may offer and what the officer may
reasonably expect. In determining the
market value, the potential of the land as
on the date of sale alone can be taken into
account and not what potential it may
have in the distant future. Any subsequent
improvement or change in the nature or
user of the land, which may result into
enhancement of the market value of the
property, is not to be taken into account
and it is only the value of the property on
the date of execution of the document that
is to be considered for the purpose of
determination of proper stamp duty
payable on the instrument.
34. In view of the above, the writ
petition is allowed. The order dated
22.09.1992 passed by the Addl. District
Magistrate
(Finance
&
Revenue),
Lucknow is hereby quashed.
35. It has been informed by learned
counsel for the petitioner that original
sale-deed has been impounded by the
opposite
party
no.
2.
Accordingly,
opposite party no. 2 is hereby directed to
release the sale-deed within a period of
one month from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 15.04.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. DHANANJAYA YESHWANT
CHANDRACHUD, C.J.
THE HON'BLE SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA, J.
Misc. Bench No. 2993 of 2015
Ashish Kumar Misra [P.I.L.]
...Petitioner
Versus
Bharat Sarkar
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Satish Kumar Misra, Prabuddh Tripathi,
Prashant Tripathi, Vineet Kumar Chaurasia
Counsel for the Respondent:
C.S.C., A.S.G., Anand Dwivedi
National Food Security Act 2013-Section13-Issue of Ration Card-with name of
eldest woman of family-apprehensionwhere no major women-by clause 2 of
section 13 itself clarify the situation-so
far
discrimination
with
transgender
concern-within purview of legislating
body-to enact suitable provisions-effort
of counsel raising public interest-duly
appreciated.
Held: Para-6
The object and purpose of Section 13 of
the Act was to bring about a sense of
empowerment for women. The purpose
of enacting Section 13 of the Act was to
recognize the status of a woman in every
household and it was in that context that
the statute has enacted that the head of
the household would be deemed to be
eldest woman member who is above the
age of eighteen. The recognition of the
eldest woman as the head of the
household is in contradistinction to a
male member since as we have already
noted above, sub-section (2) of Section 13
2 All] Ashish Kumar Misra [P.I.L.] Vs. Bharat Sarkar
511
of the Act enables a male member of the
household to be recognized as the head of
the household only in the absence of a
woman or if the sole woman is below the
age of eighteen, until she attains the age
of majority. The object and purpose of
Section 13 of the Act in other words was
not to exclude transgenders though in
view of the judgment of the Supreme
Court in National Legal Services Authority
(supra)
Parliament
may,
if
we
may
respectfully
so
say,
consider
the
appropriateness of a suitable provision to
meet the situation. This is entirely within
the purview of the legislating body and a
matter which lies in the province of the
enacting authority. The salutary public
purpose, underlying the enactment of
Section 13 of the Act can be furthered by
incorporating
a
situation
where
a
transgender can be recognized as a head
of an eligible household.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Dhananjaya
Yeshwant Chandrachud, C.J.)
1. The petition has been filed in the
public interest by a practising Advocate in
order to raise two concerns relating to the
issuance of ration cards under the
National Food Security Act, 20131. The
first issue relates to the validity of the
provisions of Section 13 of the Act on the
ground that the statutory provision while
recognizing the eldest woman member as
the head of the household does not
contemplate a situation where there may
be no woman in the family.
2. In order to appreciate this
grievance, we extract hereinbelow the
provisions of Section 13 of the Act:
"13. Women of eighteen years of age
or above to be head of household for
purpose of issue of ration cards.- (1) The
eldest woman who is not less than
eighteen years of age, in every eligible
household, shall be head of the household
for the purpose of issue of ration cards.
(2) Where a household at any time
does not have a woman or a woman of
eighteen years of age or above, but has a
female member below the age of eighteen
years, then, the eldest male member of the
household shall be the head of the
household for the purpose of issue of
ration card and the female member, on
attaining the age of eighteen years, shall
become the head of the household for
such ration cards in place of such male
member."
3. Section 13 forms part of Chapter
VI of the Act which has a provision for
the empowerment of women. Stipulating
that the eldest woman of every eligible
household, above the age of eighteen,
shall be the head of the household for the
purpose of the issue of ration cards is
intended to recognize and strengthen the
dignity, role and status of
women.
Parliament gave legal recognition to the
significant responsibilities which women
as decision makers have in a family. This
includes those having a bearing on food
security.
In
enacting
Section
13,
Parliament recognized the roles and
responsibilities which are discharged by
women. That role has been conferred with
a statutory status and recognition by
providing that the eldest woman, above
the age of eighteen in a household, shall
be regarded as the head of the household.
For too long in our history and even
today, women have been burdened with
the obligation of maintaining home and
family
without
a
corresponding
recognition or acceptance of their role as
decision
makers.
Subjected
to
discrimination and domestic violence, a
woman is left with no social security.
Something as primary as the equal
512
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
distribution of food within the family for
male and female members of the family is
a casualty. Recognizing the central role of
the woman in issues of food security is an
integral part of the constitutional right to
gender equality. Some of the worst forms
of discrimination against women originate
in the home and the kitchen. It was time
that the law made an effort to remedy it.
The submission that the statute does not
account for a situation where there may
be no woman in a family, is incorrect.
Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Act
contemplates
a
situation
where
a
household either does not have a woman
at all or where a woman member of an
eligible household is yet to attain the age
of eighteen. In such a situation, subsection (2) of Section 13 of the Act
provides that the eldest male member of
the household shall be the head of the
household for the issuance of ration cards.
Where a female member of the household
is below the age of eighteen, her status as
the head of the household, shall upon
attaining
the
age
of
eighteen,
be
recognized in terms of sub-section (2) of
Section 13 of the Act. In view of these
statutory requirements, we find no merit
in the first submission.
4. The second submission raises an
important
issue
pertaining
to
the
availability
of
food
security
for
transgenders. In National Legal Services
Authority Vs. Union of India2, the
Supreme
Court
recognized
the
fundamental right of the transgender
population as citizens of the country to
possess an equal right to realise their full
potential as human beings. Incidental to
the fundamental right to live in dignity
under Article 21 of the Constitution, is a
right of access to all facilities for
development of the personality including
education, social accumulation, access to
public
places
and
employment
opportunities.
The
Supreme
Court
observed that since transgenders are
neither male nor female, treating them as
belonging to either of these categories,
will be a denial of their constitutional
rights. The recognition of transgenders as
the third gender in law has thus become
an intrinsic part of the right to life
protected
by
Article
21
of
the
Constitution. It is a part of and incidental
to the fundamental expression of the
human personality. The full expression of
gender is what the Constitution embodies.
Among the directions which have been
issued by the Supreme Court are the
following:
"135.1. Hijras, eunuchs, apart from
binary genders, be treated as "third
gender" for the purpose of safeguarding
their rights under Part III of our
Constitution and the laws made by
Parliament and the State Legislature.
135.2. Transgender persons' right to
decide their self-identified gender is also
upheld
and
the
Centre
and
State
Governments are directed to grant legal
recognition of their gender identity such
as male, female or as third gender.
135.3. We direct the Centre and the
State Governments to take steps to treat
them as Socially and Educationally
Backward Classes of citizens and extend
all kinds of reservation in cases of
admission in educational institutions and
for public appointments.
135.7.
The
Centre
and
State
Governments should also take steps for
framing various social welfare schemes
for their betterment.
135.8.
The
Centre
and
State
Governments should take steps to create
public awareness so that TGs will feel
2 All] Ashish Kumar Misra [P.I.L.] Vs. Bharat Sarkar
513
that they are also part and parcel of the
social life and be not treated as
untouchables.
135.9. The Centre and the State
Governments should also take measures
to regain their respect and place in the
society which once they enjoyed in our
cultural and social life."
5. A ration card is an important
document issued by public authorities to
enable the holder and her family to gain
access to subsidized foodgrain. That is
why
the
objective
and
transparent
administration
of
schemes
for
the
issuance of ration cards are a critical
element in enhancing access to food
security. Food security means no less to a
transgender than to other segments of
society.
Impoverishment
and
marginalization have been endemic to the
transgender
population.
Preventing
discrimination in all walks of life is one
facet of the right of transgenders to live in
dignity, with the confidence that they can
lead their lives on their own terms in
realisation of gender identity. But the law
needs
to
travel
beyond
non
discrimination,
by
recognising
an
affirmative obligation of the State to
provide access to social security. Food
security lies at the foundation of it.
Transgenders must have both.
6. The form which has been
prescribed by the State Government for
submitting applications under the Act
contains an enumeration of several items
on which a disclosure of information has
been sought from the applicant. One of
them requires a disclosure of the name of
the woman who is the head of the
household. That however cannot be read
as an exclusion of a transgender to apply
for the issuance of a ration card and must
be read in the context of serial number
twelve of the application form. Serial
number twelve refers to the gender of the
applicant. In parathesis, the reference to
gender
is
construed
to
mean
'female/male/other'. The expression 'other'
would necessarily include a transgender.
Section 13 of the Act, may not have
specifically incorporated a provision that
would be inclusive of a head of a
household as a transgender to apply for
the issuance of a ration card. The object
and purpose of Section 13 of the Act was
to bring about a sense of empowerment
for women. The purpose of enacting
Section 13 of the Act was to recognize the
status of a woman in every household and
it was in that context that the statute has
enacted that the head of the household
would be deemed to be eldest woman
member who is above the age of eighteen.
The recognition of the eldest woman as
the head
of the household is in
contradistinction to a male member since
as we have already noted above, subsection (2) of Section 13 of the Act
enables a male member of the household
to be recognized as the head of the
household only in the absence of a
woman or if the sole woman is below the
age of eighteen, until she attains the age
of majority. The object and purpose of
Section 13 of the Act in other words was
not to exclude transgenders though in
view of the judgment of the Supreme
Court
in
National
Legal
Services
Authority (supra) Parliament may, if we
may respectfully so say, consider the
appropriateness of a suitable provision to
meet the situation. This is entirely within
the purview of the legislating body and a
matter which lies in the province of the
enacting authority. The salutary public
purpose, underlying the enactment of
Section 13 of the Act can be furthered by
514
 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
incorporating
a
situation
where
a
transgender can be recognized as a head
of an eligible household.
7. For the purposes of these
proceedings, we are of the view that the
form which has been prescribed by the
State Government, duly takes into account
the
concerns
of
the
transgender
population
by
recognizing
their
entitlement to seek access to food security
and to avail of the status of the head of a
household.
8. We are of the view that the
clarification, which we have issued above,
would sufficiently subserve the important
public purpose, which is served by the
institution of the writ petition by a
member of the Bar. The effort which has
been made by the learned counsel must be
duly appreciated by the Court.
9. The petition is, accordingly,
disposed of. There shall be no order as to
costs.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 01.04.2015
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAJIV SHARMA, J.
THE HON'BLE RAKESH SRIVASTAVA,J.
W.P. No. 5219 (MB) of 2011
Lakshmi Devi
 ...Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sharwan Kumar Pandey and Rajeiu Kumar
Tripathi
Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C. , A.S.G. and Neeraj Kumar Tiwari
Constitution of India, Art.-21-claim of exgratia payment-denied on ground no post
postmortem report produced by claimantsignoring
G.O.
Dated
24.01.2005-death
caused
due
to
lightening-considering
definition of Natural Calamity as well as 'exgratia payment'-hypertechnicalties avoidedgrant of relief should be interpreted liberallyorder
without
application
of
mind-not
sustainable-direction to ensure payment
within 2 months.
Held: Para-14
Furthermore,
no
material
has
been
brought on record by the respondents to
show that the cause of death of the
petitioner's husband was not due to
lightening but due to any other reason.
Therefore, it is clear that the impugned
order has been passed without application
of mind and considering all aspects of
matter. Even otherwise, for grant of relief
provisions should be interpreted very
liberally to cover every victim of natural
disaster.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.)
1. Petitioner's husband, namely,
Ashok Kumar (deceased) died unnatural
death on 18.4.2011 on account of natural
calamity (lightening) while harvesting the
wheat crops. According to petitioner, a
"panchnama" was prepared in presence of
Village Pradhan, Area Lekhpal and NaibTahsildar on the spot itself. In the
report,cause of death of the petitioner's
husband has been indicated due to
"lightening" in clear words. As there is a
Circular/Government Order providing for
compensation to the family of the
deceased under the National Calamities
Emergency Fund, the petitioner preferred
an application to the competent authority
for ex-gratia payment of compensation
and completed the necessary formalities.
The said claim of the petitioner has been
rejected by the impugned order dated
12.8.2011.