1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.(MD)No.1438 of 2011 'SOCO' Trust, Represented by its Managing Trustee A.Mahaboob Batcha ..Petitioner Vs. 1.Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, Department of Information Technology, New Delhi. 2.The Director and Head of Department, Human Centred Computing Division, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology Department of Information Technology, New Delhi. 3.State of Tamil Nadu Represented by the Secretary, Department of Communication and Information Technology, Chennai. ..Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent No.1 to withdraw its proposal of encoding the Indian Heritage Scripts (Vedic/Sanskrit/Grantha) in the Unicode Standard in order to preserve the heritage of Tamil Language and preventing it from adulteration. For Petitioner : Mr. T. Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr. C.Ramachandran (R1 & R2) Govt.Advocate For Respondent-3 : Mr. M.Rajarajan Govt.Advocate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR,J.) The prayer in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No.1 to withdraw its proposal of encoding the Indian Heritage Scripts (Vedic/Sanskrit/Grantha) in the Unicode Standard in order to preserve the heritage of Tamil Language and preventing it from adulteration. 2.The grievance of the petitioner, who is the Society for Community Organisation (SOCO) is that the first respondent has sent a communication of Unicode Consortium for a proposal to encode Indian Heritage Scripts in Unicode Standard and the said action is affecting the Tamil language. On 07.02.2011, the petitioner also submitted a representation and prayed for withdrawing the said proposal of encoding of Indian Heritage Scripts and no action is being taken, the writ petition is filed. 3.When the writ petition was posted for admission on 07.02.2011, the learned Central Government as well as the State Government counsel were directed to take notice. 4.Today the learned Government Advocate produced an order passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu in G.O.Ms.No.1, Information Technology Department dated 19.01.2011 constituting a high level committee headed by a retired Hon' ble Supreme Court Judge, Justice S.Mohan and the committee is to go into all the issues and will submit a report. 5.In the light of the appointment of the high level committee as per G.O.Ms.No.1, Information Technology Department, dated 19.01.2011, the petitioner's grievance is somewhat met and the Government of Tamil Nadu is taking appropriate action by constituting the committee, no further direction is required to be passed in the writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (C.O.) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, Department of Information Technology, New Delhi. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 2.The Director and Head of Department, Human Centred Computing Division, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology Department of Information Technology, New Delhi. 3. The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu Department of Communication and Information Technology, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.C.Ramachandran, Advocate SR.No.10815 +1cc to Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate SR.No.10716 +1cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.11005 MPK akm/24.03.11 /3p-7c/ W.P.(MD)No.1438 of 2011 01.03.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/