DEBANGSU BASAK,J. - (1.) A reasoned order dated December 13, 2011 passed by the Secretary is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is a Muslim belonging to Sunni Sect. He had applied for being appointed as a Muslim Marriage Registrar. He had stood second in the panel. There can be two Muslim Registrars in the same police station. Both can be from the same sect. He relies upon a decision of the Government in this regard. He submits that, the Government cannot approbate and reprobate in respect of such appointment. The impugned order proceeds on the basis of the second proviso to Section 3 of the Bengal Mohammedan Marriage and Divorce Registration Act, 1876. Such provision is not mandatory. Therefore, there is no impediment on the part of the State government to appoint two Muslim Marriage Registrars in respect of the same police station from the same sect, that is, Sunni. He further points out that, the advertisement allowed two persons from the same sect. to be appointed. 3. None appears for the respondents. It appears from the record that, an appeal was disposed of by an order dated September 12, 2011 requiring the Judicial Secretary to consider and decide the representation made by the petitioner. The Judicial Secretary has done so by the impugned order dated December 13, 2011. The Judicial Secretary has relied upon the second proviso of Section 3 of the Act of 1876. Section 3 of the Act of 1876 is as follows:- "Sec.3 of Bengal Mohammedan Marriage and Divorce Registration Act, 1876 States- 'It shall be lawful for the State Government to grant a license to any person being a Mohammedan, authorizing him to register Mohammedan Marriages and Divorces which have been effected within certain specified limits, on application being made to him for such registration and in like manner, it shall be lawful for the State Government to revoke or suspend such license: provided that more than two persons shall be licensed to exercise the said functions within the same limit: provided further that when two persons are so licensed to act within the same limit, the one shall be a member of the Sunni, and the other of the Shia Sect.'" 4. The second proviso of Section 3 specifies that, when two persons are licensed to act within the same limit, one shall be a member of the Sunni, and the other of the Shia Sect. The second proviso, to my mind is mandatory. It uses the word "shall". Any other interpretation will make the word "shall" otiose. There is apparently a decision of the Government dated November 24, 2016 where two persons from the same sect were given appointment. Such a decision, to my mind, is contrary to second proviso of Section 3 of the Act of 1876. The petitioner cannot have a relief on the basis of negative equality. The provision in the advertisement, contrary to the second proviso of Section 3 of the Act of 1876 cannot be pressed into service by the petitioner for relief. 5. In such circumstances, I find no reason to interfere in the present writ petition. 6. W.P. No.17571 (W) of 2012 is dismissed. 7. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Urgent website certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.;