NHRC seeks action taken report on caste-derogatory village, locality names across India
The matter was brought before the NHRC through a complaint dated July 10, 2025, and considered by the Commission on July 28.
The complainant had raised serious concerns about the persistence of offensive nomenclature that reflects caste-based discrimination.
The Commission noted that such names violate the constitutional ideals of equality and human dignity, and contribute to the continued social stigma faced by the Scheduled Castes, even after over 7 decades of Independence.
Taking cognisance under Section 12 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, a Bench presided over by NHRC Member Priyank Kanoongo directed the issuance of a formal notice.
The Commission emphasised that the NHRC is empowered under the Act to investigate such matters with the authority of a civil court.
The NHRC stated: 'The complainant has urged that such names be reviewed and renamed, as they are offensive and contrary to the constitutional ideals of equality and human dignity.'
The Commission also cited several key legal and administrative references to support its directive. These include a 1990 circular from the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment instructing all governments to discontinue the use of the word 'Harijan', and a 1982 Ministry of Home Affairs directive banning the use of both 'Harijan' and 'Girijan.'
States like Odisha, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Delhi, Punjab, and Kerala have already taken steps to enforce constitutionally-appropriate terminology.
Further, the NHRC highlighted the Supreme Court's 2017 ruling in Manju Devi vs. Onkarjit Singh Ahluwalia & Others, which observed that caste-referential terms such as 'Harijan' and 'Dhobi' could constitute social insult or abuse.
The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, particularly Section 3(1)(u), also criminalises the use of caste-based slurs, naming terms like 'Chamar', 'Bhangi', and 'Mehtar' as punishable offenses.
The Commission also referenced a 2024 Supreme Court order in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) directing the government to consider removing casteist terms such as 'Chamar', 'Kanjar', 'Chuhra', and 'Bhangi' from official records.
In its directive, the NHRC has asked all concerned authorities to compile and submit a list of towns, villages, panchayats, and other public spaces that still carry caste-indicative or derogatory names.
It has also requested a report on the measures being taken to rename or remove such terms. The deadline for submission is four weeks from the date of notice.
The Commission aims to address systemic discrimination embedded in geographical and administrative nomenclature, and to ensure that public spaces reflect the values enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
16 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC orders discontinuation of 'inhuman' hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran
MUMBAI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Maharashtra government to put an end to the functioning of hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran within six months and switch to e-rickshaws, while calling the practice 'inhuman' and 'against the basic concept of human dignity'. SC orders discontinuation of 'inhuman' hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran Hearing a plea filed by the Handcart Pullers Association seeking the introduction of e-rickshaws in place of the manual hand-pulled rickshaws, a bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice N V Anjaria said, 'Permitting such a practice, which is against the basic concept of human dignity in a country like India, belittles the constitutional promises of social and economic justice.' While referring to a scheme in Gujarat where the government issued e-rickshaws to locals in Kevadia on rent, the apex court told the Maharashtra government to come up with similar schemes and also ordered the setting up of Matheran Monitoring Committee, under the chairmanship of the district collector, which will be responsible to identify the people to whom the e-rickshaw licenses shall be issued. The court added that the beneficiaries could also include tribal women to ensure them a steady livelihood. The bench also noted that the state government should not make an excuse of a lack of funds and said, 'We clarify that non-availability of funds cannot be an excuse for non-implementation of the aforesaid scheme. We earnestly hope that the state would tender necessary assistance in stopping such an inhumane practice.' The court also told the state authorities to lay concrete paver blocks in Matheran and allow the local body to lay only clay paver blocks in the market area of the hill town, while making it clear that no paver blocks should be laid on the internal roads or the trekking routes of the hill town, which is the only pedestrian hill station in Asia and has been identified as an Ecologically Sensitive Zone (ESZ) by the Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi HC issues notice in petition challenging UPSC decision barring women from military academies through CDS exam
New Delhi A bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Centre and UPSC to file their response in a petition. (Representative photo) The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice in a petition challenging the Union Public Services Commission's (UPSC) decision barring women from applying to military academies through the Combined Defence Services (CDS) examination. A bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Centre and UPSC to file their response in a petition filed by Kush Kalra, and fixed the next hearing for November 12. In his petition, Kalra asserted that UPSC's May 28 advertisement for the CDS-II Examination 2025, restricting women from applying to three of the four service branches—the Indian Military Academy (IMA), Dehradun; Indian Naval Academy (INA), Ezhimala; and Air Force Academy (AFA), Hyderabad—was arbitrary and violative of the fundamental right to equality and profession. The notification only permits women to apply to the Officers Training Academy, Chennai, in the Short Service Commission (SSC) course. Kalra, in his plea, contended through advocate Jyotika Kalra, sought to highlight the inconsistency between the exclusion and the government's own statement in the same notification, which claimed it 'strives to have a workforce which reflects gender balance and women candidates are encouraged to apply.' Such a contradiction, Kalra argued, exposes a systemic and discriminatory barrier that undermines the rights of aspiring women candidates and runs counter to constitutional principles and the Supreme Court's 2020 ruling on permanent commission. In February 2020, the Supreme Court, while allowing permanent commission to women officers in the Army, ruled that restricting the appointment of women to command positions was unconstitutional. To be sure, the Centre in September 2021, after the Supreme Court's nudge, informed the court about its decision to induct women into the National Defence Academy (NDA). However, the top court in January 2022 demanded an explanation from the Union government on restricting the intake of women cadets in the upcoming session of the NDA to 19– the same as last year. Citing the example of Col Sofyia Qureshi, one of the two women officers who briefed the media after India's execution of Operation Sindoor, Kalra in his petition asserted that denying entry to women through CDS would deprive the country of such officers. 'This exclusion of women candidates from the opportunity to get employed through CDS, becomes a hurdle in the career advancement opportunities for women officers in the armed forces. The categorical exclusion of women candidates from applying for the CDS examination and getting selected for IMA, AFA and INA solely on the grounds of sex, without any reasonable or justifiable explanations is a violation of the fundamental right to equality,' the petition read. Kalra said that even though the high court in April directed the Centre to take a call on the entry of women in CDS within eight weeks, no decision has been taken until now.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Give details on nixing nod to prosecute 4 netas: SC to TN
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Tamil Nadu govt to provide details of cases pertaining to four political personalities against whom sanction for prosecution in corruption cases granted by the competent authorities were withdrawn following a change of government in the state after elections. TN additional advocate general Amit Anand Tiwari termed the PIL filed by Chennai-based lawyer Karuppiah Gandhi in this connection as a "motivated petition", aimed at garnering political mileage, and asserted before a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N K Singh that the state has scrupulously adhered to the procedure established by law to deal with the cases. Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate D S Naidu said the petition referred to 18 political personalities, who were or are ministers or MPs, against whom investigations were derailed, chargesheets were supplemented with assertions about their innocence to close the cases, or sanction for prosecution granted earlier were withdrawn. "Withdrawing sanction to prosecute is unheard of in criminal jurisprudence," he said. Referring to Tiwari's "politically motivated petition" argument, Justice Bhuyan told Naidu, "This is a malady not confined to Tamil Nadu alone. It is spread to the entire country. If you open a Pandora's box, it will come back to you one day". Tiwari said that investigations were carried out in the cases and taken to logical ends. The Madras high court was seized of some of the cases, he said. The bench told him, "Why don't you file a short affidavit giving details about the four cases where the previous sanction for prosecution was withdrawn allegedly after a change of political regime? We will confine the proceedings to these four cases, which appear to be serious". On the prayer of the petitioner to transfer trial in these cases against politicians to another state, the bench said it would create complications over appointment of public prosecutor (PP). Naidu said the state where the cases are transferred can be empowered to appoint the PP, to which the bench did not agree. Tamil Nadu, in its affidavit filed earlier, had said, "The criminal cases investigated by the Directorate of Vigilance and anti-corruption bureau are dealt with in accordance with law without extraneous pressure. In spite of the party in power, the investigation, trial and appeal proceedings are carried out as per the established law and procedure".
