Petition for exemption from 2-child norm irks activists

Shirude wanted him to be an exeptional case and sought a waiver from Section 10 (1)(i) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act that disqualifies contestants having more than two children. The two-child norm to promote family planning was added after the Act was amended in 2000.

Shirude’s petition also stated that Mahesh Kulkarni,BJP secretary from Pimpri-Chinchwad,had written to the chief minister on October 12 seeking cancellation of the two-child clause from the Act or adding exceptions to the rule,in case one or two children are handicapped or mentally challenged,or one or both children have died during childhood,or a third child was born due to failure of vasectomy or any equivalent family planning operation.

Shirude’s lawyers Birendra Saraf and Hitesh Jain argued that he was only asking the court to relax the two-child norm as one of his children who was visually challenged was unable to take care of himself and the decision to have a third child was taken in the childrens’ interest.

Kanchan Pamnani,a solicitor from Mumbai,who is visually-impaired,had pleaded with the court for intervention. She told the court that it was extremely shameful that a person vying for a public position is filing such a discriminatory petition. “It is also shocking that a political party (BJP) is backing such a cause,when India had ratified the UN convention on the rights of the disabled,” she said.

Among the activists in Pune who were irked by the petition was Manav Kamble,an activist who works for PWDs after he lost his legs in a train accident. He said he was hurt by the petition. “I even spoke to several political leaders and told them this is just not done,” he said. Kamble said in some instances,he has seen even parents being insensitive to their disabled children.

“Some people really do not consider the disabled as an integral part of the society. This is very hurtful.”

An HC bench of Justice Sharad Bobde heard Saraf – no lawyer was present for the government – and was convinced that Shirude’s petition held no merit. The court said any exception to the rule to allow a third child when one child was physically challenged,would result in discrimination.