Vrinda Grover on Facebook
In January 2014 Justice Ramanna as the then Chief Justce of Delhi High Court, in a judgment by him and J. R.S Endlaw, while rejecting the plea of unaided schools against Govt nursery school admission guidelines and scrapping the 20% management quota, drew an analogy with CHASTITY!!
Pasted below is the relevant para from the Delhi High Court judgment dated 20th January 2014:
(para 17) It thus appears that the argument of autonomy of the school being
affected by admission of one child against another child, cannot be said to
be causing any irreparable loss or injury to the school. It also cannot be lost
sight of that the admission, if any, would be only of one batch of students
i.e. for the current academic year. Upon the appellants succeeding in the
writ petitions and which we are confident would be disposed of before the
commencement of the admissions for the next academic year, the autonomy
of the schools in the matter of admission, even if affected by the impugned
orders, would be restored. It is not as if, it will be gone for ever like
chastity. Conversely, if the writ petitions were to fail and the orders
impugned therein were to be upheld, grant of stay would for all times to
come affect those who under the impugned orders may be entitled to
admission to a school and who would be denied admission, if the operation
of the impugned orders were to be stayed.
The Supreme Court in the Appeal while upholding the High Court Judgment,
expunged the comment pertaining to chastity, –
” IT IS NOT AS IF IT WILL BE GONE FOREVER LIKE CHASTITY”
Clearly a mature understanding of gender and womens rights is not a prerequisite to holding the highest judicial office in India. The reference to chastity betrays why justice for women is viewed within the narrow scope of the protectionist regime.
There is an urgent need to purge our minds of this obsession with womens’ chastity. Only then can we talk of women enjoying citizenship rights and human rights.