The Delhi High Court on Tuesday rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition that sought directives for the uniform replacement of the term ‘Central Government’ with ‘Union Government’ across all laws, legislation, and official communications.
The plea stated that the Indian Constitution has always had a clear division and separation of powers between the Union government and the State government, with the clear intent of stating the Government of India as a Union and not as a Central Government
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna made the decision, asserting that the terms Union of India, Union Government, or Central Government are commonly employed interchangeably, and there is no apparent issue with such usage.
The court, emphasizing the insignificance of the matter, remarked, “It does not matter how you address them (government). We have far more important matters to deal with.” It drew a parallel by mentioning that the Supreme Court of India is also interchangeably referred to as the Apex Court.
“Please understand. We call the Supreme Court of India, the Supreme Court, and the Apex Court as well. This is not a case for a PIL. These terms are used interchangeably,” the court clarified before dismissing the petition. It further stated that a detailed order outlining the decision will be issued.
Petitioner Atmaram Saraogi, an 84-year-old senior citizen and alumnus of Calcutta and Harvard Universities, stated that the Constitution of India, which was passed and adopted on January 26, 1950, contains a clear division and separation of powers between the Union government and the State government, with the clear intent of stating the Government of India as Union and not as Central Government.
“Article 1 of the Constitution of India used the words ‘The Union and its Territory’ and states that ‘India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States’. Interestingly, the terms ‘Centre’ or ‘Central Government’ have consciously not been used in any of the 395 articles divided into 22 parts and/or in eight schedules of the Constitution of India, thereby implying the indestructible nature of its unity between all the units,” the plea read.
The plea filed by Advocate Hemant Raj, and argued by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarananrayanan, further stated that the constituent assembly has not used the term “Central Government” or “Centre” on any of its 395 Articles in 22 parts and 8 schedules in the Original Constitution and very cautious use of the word “Centre” or “Central Government” was intended to keep away the tendency of centralizing powers in one unit.
“This was also one of the basic features of the Constitution which cannot be altered,” the plea added.
The correct term was debated extensively in the Constitutional Assembly, and Dr. Ambedkar clarified that ‘the union is not a league of States united in a loose relationship; nor are the States the agencies of the Union, deriving power from it.’ The Constitution created both the Union and the States, and both derive their authority from it,” the plea read.