Like Ayodhya, go by SC verdict on Sabarimala: Kerala Devaswom Minister to BJP

News Network
November 13, 2019

Thiruvananthapuram, Nov 13: Kerala Devaswom Minister Kadakampally Surendran on Tuesday asked the BJP, which has welcomed the recent Supreme Court order on Ayodhya, to also respect the apex court verdict on Sabarimala permitting women of all ages to pray at the Lord Ayyappa shrine.

Surendran, who was replying to a question posed by the lone BJP legislator O Rajagopal, also asked the saffron party not to encourage "goons and anti-socials" to go to Sabarimala. Rajagopal had sought a reply from the minister on the arrangements made at the hilltop shrine ahead of the annual pilgrimage season.

The BJP member alleged that the number of devotees to the shrine came down last year and wondered why the Left government supported the entry of "atheist, Left activists" and others into the temple.

Countering it, Surendran said, "Please don't encourage anti-socials and goons to go to Sabarimala like last time", an apparent reference to violence during the protest against entry of young women.

"Society expects more from a personality like you (Rajagopal). Now, the Ayodhya case verdict has come, your party has welcomed it with open arms. Hope the same attitude will be there with respect to the Sabarimala issue," Surendran said.

The minister said facilities have been arranged for keeping the sacred offerings of around 6,500 devotees while a total of 1,161 toilets, 160 bathrooms and 150 urinals had been set up. "Five emergency medical centres have also been readied. Three incinerators and 600 waste bins are also there," he told the House.

The shrine had witnessed protests by devotees and right outfits against the LDF government's decision to implement the Supreme Court verdict in 2018 allowing all women, including those in the menstruating age, to offer prayers at the hill shrine.

The court had lifted the traditional ban on women in the 10-50 age group from entering the temple.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 27,2020

Lucknow, May 27: Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath has taken a U-turn, two days after he declared that permission would be needed if other states employ workers from UP.

The issue sparked a major controversy and an official spokesman has now said that the government would not include this clause of 'prior permission' in the bye-laws of the Migration Commission.

The government spokesman also said it was working on modalities to set up the commission to provide jobs and social security to migrant workers returning to the state. It has named the migration commission as the "Shramik Kalyan Aayog (Workers welfare commission).

About 26 lakh migrants have already returned to the state and an exercise to map their skills is being carried out to help them get jobs.

Yogi Adityanath has discussed the modalities for setting up the commission and told his officers to complete the skill mapping exercise in 15 days.

A senior official of Team 11, said, "The chief minister discussed the modalities for setting up the commission, as well. There will be no provision requiring other states to seek UP government's prior permission for employing our manpower. The commission is being set up to provide jobs and social security to the workers. We will also link the migrants to the government schemes to provide them houses and loans etc."

Yogi Adityanath said a letter should be sent to all state governments to find out about migrant workers wanting to come back to Uttar Pradesh.

Earlier, the chief minister, while speaking at a webinar on Sunday, had said, "The migration commission will work in the interest of migrant workers. If any other state wants UP's manpower, they cannot take them just like that, but will have to seek permission of the UP government. The way our migrant workers were ill-treated in other states, the UP government will take their insurance, social security in its hands now. The state government will stand by them wherever they work, whether in Uttar Pradesh, other states or other countries."

The statement had sparked a row with some political leaders and parties questioning the move.

Former Congress president Rahul Gandhi sharply criticized Adityanath's stand, saying the workers were not the chief minister's personal property.

"It is very unfortunate that the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh views India in such a way. These people are not his personal property. They are not the personal property of Uttar Pradesh. These people are Indian citizens and they have the right to decide what they want to do and they have the right to live the life they want to live," he had said.

Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray had also taken on Adityanath and said that if UP insists on "permission" before other states can employ workers from there, "then any migrant entering Maharashtra would need to take permissions from us, from the Maharashtra state, our police force too."

Meanwhile, the government spokesman said, "The chief minister is deeply moved by the condition of migrants. They have been treated badly by other states. So, when the chief minister spoke about the need for seeking UP government's permission, he did so as a guardian for workers. It's only his concern for the migrants that came out as a political statement."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 17,2020

Jaipur, Jun 17: Police have registered an FIR against a television news anchor for allegedly making an objectionable comment on Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti.

The FIR was lodged after a complaint against News 18 India anchor Amish Devgan by a "khadim" at the saint's dargah in Ajmer on Tuesday night.

"He is running a communal agenda against the Muslim community. The dargah of Sufi saint is visited not only by Muslims but by people of all religions and his comments have hurt the sentiments of all," Syed Sarwar Chishti said.

The anchor later apologised on Twitter. "In 1 of my debates, I inadvertently referred to 'Khilji' as Chishti. I sincerely apologise for this grave error and the anguish it may hv caused to followers of the Sufi saint Moinuddin Chishti, whom I revere. I have in the past sought blessings at his dargah. I regret this error," Devgan tweeted.

Dargah SHO Hem Raj said a case was registered under sections of the Indian Penal Code and the IT Act for outraging religious feelings.

Another complaint was lodged by activist Muzaffar Bharti at the office of Ajmer's Superintendent of Police.

He accused Devgan and his team of trying to incite riots through "misleading and objectionable debates on communal issues".

He said Devgan made highly objectionable remarks on the revered saint, which shall not be tolerated.

"The dargah of Moinuddin Chishti is the symbol of brotherhood and harmony and crores of people of different religions all over the world have deep love and faith in the saint," he said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
August 6,2020

New Delhi Aug 6: In a new twist in the Vijay Mallya case, a certain document connected with the case in the Supreme Court has gone missing from the apex court files. 

A bench comprising Justices U.U. Lalit and Ashok Bhushan adjourned the hearing to August 20.

It was hearing the review plea filed by Mallya against a July 14, 2017 judgment wherein he was found guilty of contempt for not paying Rs 9,000 crore dues to banks despite repeated directions, although he had transferred $40 million to his children.

The bench was looking for a reply on an intervention application, which it seemed has gone missing from the case papers.Parties involved in the case sought more time to file fresh copies.

On June 19, the Supreme Court sought explanation from its registry regarding Mallya's appeal against the May 2017 conviction in the contempt case for not repaying Rs 9,000 crore dues to banks not listed for the last 3 years.

A bench comprising Justices Lalit and Bhushan had asked the Registry to furnish all the details including names of the officials who had dealt with the file concerning the Review Petition for last three years.

The bench said according to the record, placed before it, the review petition was not listed before the court for last three years. "Before we deal with the submissions raised in the Review Petition, we direct the Registry to explain why the Review Petition was not listed before the concerned Court for last three years," said the bench.In May 2017, the apex court held him guilty of contempt of court for transferring $40 million to his children, and ordered him to appear on July 10 to argue on the quantum of punishment.

The bench said let the explanation be furnished within two weeks. "The Review Petition shall, thereafter, be considered on merits," it added.In 2017, the apex court passed the order on a contempt petition against Mallya by a consortium of banks led by the SBI. 

The banks claimed Mallya transferred $40 million from Daigeo to his children's accounts, and did not use this money to clear his debt. Banks cited this as violation of judicial orders.

stm88 info live rtp slot

slot auto scatter hitam

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.