DC debate: Court notice on caste rallies, for the better or for worse?

[1]

Order is against the Constitution
Anbumani Ramadoss, PMK leader and former Union Minister
The order of Allahabad bench of Lucknow high court banning caste rallies is judicial overreach. It is against the Indian Constitution. It is against social justice. Article 19 (1) clearly says; everybody has the right to meet or gather peacefully. It does not differentiate between caste and religion or individuals and organisations.
Only banned organisations cannot hold a rally.  Even reservation is based on caste. Constitution guarantees reservation based on social factors. Any aggrieved caste needs a forum to voice its views. For instance, the Gujjars felt that they were not adequately represented. They demanded SC status. They needed a forum like meetings and rallies to discuss it. They did that.
In Tamil Nadu, Devendrakula Velalar community does not want to be classified under SC category. Narikurava community demands SC status. Don’t they need a forum to make their grievances heard by the government? Ban­ning rallies would deprive them that forum and hence the HC order goes against social justice of deprived communities.
Also, it is a direct infringement of individual and organisations’ con­sti­tutionally guaranteed rights. Even ‘misused’ laws like POTA and TADA were repealed only after discussing them in a forum. There has to be a redressal mechanism for everything. I am not against the court. If a particular case needs action, the court can ban rallies there, but certainly not a blanket ban.
Secondly, why did the court restrict the verdict to caste and not religion? Why do  leading political parties like DMK field only a member of majority community in a constituency in elections? Caste and politics are intertwined across India.
However, political parties, including the PMK, have the responsibility to ensure that their rallies do not instigate members of other castes or communities.  If necessary, PMK will move the Supreme Court against the Allahabad high court order. The case will not hold water when someone goes on appeal.
A step in right direction indeed
B.S. Gnanadesikan, TN Conress president and Rajya Sabha MP
The Allahabad bench of Lucknow high court has shown the right direction. Politics in India must be based on political ideology and parties must take care of inclusive growth, social justice and uplifting suppressed classes. That is the primary objective of Indian democracy.
The founding fathers of Indian democracy have designed Indian Con­st­itution that way. Unfo­rtunately, caste-based politics has raised its head, which does not augur well for Indian democracy.
The recent incident in Dhar­mapuri, where an ordinary love affair was converted into a caste conflict, must be an eye-opener. If politics is based on caste, then caste conflict becomes inevitable.
No doubt Articles 14 & 19 (1) of the Constitution speak about non-discrimination based on caste and the right to form an association. There is nothing wrong in a community or organisation expressing freely and frankly without fear.
Organisations can come forward to support the communities' demand for justice against social evils. Trouble brews when parties exceed the limit and convert themselves to caste-based parties and speak only for a particular caste. This country belongs to everyone and political parties should operate within that framework.
If a political party backed by a particular caste wins public mandate and gets a chance to rule the state or country, how will people expect equal treatment from the state or country, which is supposed to treat everyone equal?
Allahabad court might have felt  that caste rallies would lead to law and order problem due to provocative speeches, which is not protected under Article 19 (1) of the Constitution.
In north India rallies include meetings, but in Tamil Nadu, only processions. Sloganeering in processions could provoke other castes. We have to analyse if the order prohibits only rallies or meetings. I am not in agreement with the high court if it also prohibits meetings as well. I believe the order applies only to Uttar Pradesh and not to other states.