The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Union of India and the Ministry of Defence for formation of a regiment of the Gujjar community in the Indian Armed Forces..The PIL was listed before Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. “Which is the law which gives you a right to have such kind of regiment? Where is that right?” Chief Justice questioned. The petitioner eventually withdrew the petition after the Bench warned him of costs. .The petitioner moved the Court stating that the Gujjar community has a rich martial history and has contributed significantly to India's military, security and freedom struggles. “The Gujjar community has a well-documented history of bravery, having participated in various wars, including the 1857 Revolt, Inda-Pak Wars of 1947, 1965, 1971, Kargil War (1999), and counterinsurgency operations in Jammu & Kashmir. Despite this rich martial legacy, they have not been accorded a dedicated regiment, unlike other martial communities such as Sikhs, Jats, Rajputs, Gorkhas, and Dogras,” the petition stated. It was urged to allow the petition for ensuring their right to equality, representation and their inclusion in national defence..The petition highlighted that the Indian Army has a long-standing tradition of community-based regiments that recognize the martial heritage of different ethnic and regional groups. Examples of Sikh Regiment, Jat Regiment, Rajput Regiment, Gorkha Regiment, Dogra Regiment and Mahar Regiment were cited. These regiments were formed to honour the historical military contributions of these communities, it was contended.However, Gujjars have not been accorded the same recognition in the form of a dedicated regiment despite their marital tradition, the petition stated. “A Gujjar regiment would not create division but rather integrate another historic martial community into the Indian Army's regimental system, fostering greater unity, representation and national integration,” the plea said.The petitioner told the Court that he had made representations to the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Defence for the formation of a Gujjar regiment. .The Court observed that the petition is highly divisive and warned that it would impose costs on the party. He told the counsel representing the petitioner that it is her duty to guide the clients.In light of the same, the petition was withdrawn.
