AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Lakshmanan, J.—By consent of parties, the main writ petition itself has been taken up for final disposal.
The petitioner has filed the writ petition to quash the proceedings of the second respondent dated 2-7-1991 and consequently to direct the
respondents to issue marriage licence to the petitioner either under the Travancore Law or under Sections. 6 and 9 of the Indian Christian
Marriage Act, 1872.
I have heard Mr. Paul Vasanthakumar, Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Shanmugham, Additional Government Pleader.
The petitioner submits that he underwent the two years course of Theology and obtained a certificate of theology from Bible School at Pundur in
Kerala State and he was appointed as a Church worker in South India Assemblies of God Church at Karingal. It is stated that after one year of
service, the said South India Assemblies of God issued a worker certificate on 9-9-1981 and in the year 1982, he was ordained as Minister of
South India Assemblies of God and on the basis of the ordination conferred, the petitioner is entitled to conduct marriages, Baptism and other
religious ceremonies according to the Christian rites. For that purpose, the Pastor has to be licensed by the first respondent. On 27-1-1990, the
petitioner has applied to the first respondent through the second respondent for the issue of marriage licence Under Sections. 6 and 9 of the Indian
Christian Marriage Act. It is also urged that similar licences have been issued to similar Pastors/Ministers.
The second respondent, called for a report from the Tahsildar, Kalkulam and based on the report of the Tahsildar, called for a report from the
Sub-Collector-third respondent, who has submitted a favourable report to the second respondent. Inspite of the same, the second respondent
rejected the petitioner''s request stating that the petitioner can renew his application for the grant of licence u/s 9 of the Indian Christian Marriage
Act, after the extension of the said Act to the transferred territories of Agastbeswaram, Thovalai, Kalkulam and Vilavancode Taluks of
Kanyakumari District.
The said order is challenged in this writ petition.
It is not in dispute that the respondents issued marriage licences to several Pastors/Ministers, namely A, Sathiadhas, Y.S. Devasundaram, A.
Tnesan, M. Christudhas, M. Thassiah, John R. Mani, S. Yesudhasan, Joseph D. John, S. Yesudhas, T. Sthavan and T.G. Boas, who are also
from Kanyakumari District. In these circumstances, I am of the view, that denying the same benefit to the petitioner alone is arbitrary and violative
of Article .14 of the Constitution of India. According to the petitioner, if the Indian Christian Marriage Act is not extended to Kanyakumari District,
the Travancore Cochin Law which was applicable to Travancore area can be applied and the petitioner should be given licence under the
Travancore Law.
The only argument urged by the learned Additional Government Pleader is that the petitioner was only requested to renew his application after
the extension of the Indian Christian Marriage Act to the transferred territories, which is under examination of the Government and that the
petitioner''s application was not rejected totally.
I ''am unable to accept the reason given by the Additional Government Pleader. We do not know when the Act will be extended to the area in
question. Till such time, the petitioner cannot be asked to wait indefinitely. When the respondents have issued licences to several other
Pastors/Ministers in Kanyakumari District, denying the same to the petitioner alone is, in my view, is unreasonable and arbitrary.
Hence, I allow the writ petition as prayed for, The second respondent''s proceedings dated 2-7-1991 is quashed and the first respondent is
directed to issue marriage licence to the petitioner either under the Travancore Law or under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1972, within two
(2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
There will be no order as to costs.