1. Home
  2. Babri Masjid verdict: Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind to file review petition

Babri Masjid verdict: Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind to file review petition

News Network
November 17, 2019

New Delhi, Nov 17: The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind will file a review petition challenging the Supreme Court's Ayodhya verdict, the prominent Muslim organisation's chief Maulana Arshad Madani said on Sunday.

The decision was taken after the Jamiat's highest decision-making body, the working committee, gave its nod for filing the review petition following extensive deliberations involving lawyers and experts.

The panel under the chairmanship of Madani delved into the prospects of a review petition challenging the apex court verdict, a statement by Jamiat said.

The expert panel observed that the judgment was against the Muslim parties and it was not a final judgment as the option of reviewing it is available under the Constitution of India, it said.

Settling a fractious issue that goes back more than a century, the Supreme Court, in its verdict in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi title case on November 9, said the entire 2.77 acres of disputed land should be handed over to the deity Ram Lalla, who was one of the three litigants in the case.

The five-judge Constitution bench also directed the Centre to allot a five-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya to build a mosque.

Comments

Shahul Ahmed
 - 
Monday, 18 Nov 2019

What is so called "Grand Mufti" is doing???????.............

Well Wisher
 - 
Sunday, 17 Nov 2019

Atleast a scholar from North India taken a step ahead. Well done Maulana Saab. Let every muslim scholars come forth to file the review petition on VERDICT of SC.

 

People from South India should approach famous scholor Maulana A.P Abubakker - Kerala to fight against the injustice which is need of the day.

Ahmed
 - 
Sunday, 17 Nov 2019

Good Move... Appreciated...

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
August 3,2020

New Delhi, Aug 3: Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP Digvijaya Singh on Monday said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should defer the foundation stone laying ceremony for Ram temple from August 5 as it will be an "inauspicious hour" for the event.

"I request Modi Ji again that the inauspicious occasion of August 5 (for foundation stone laying ceremony for Ram temple) should be deferred. The construction of Ram temple is to begin after hundreds of years of struggle and PM Modi should leave his stubbornness that may cause an obstruction in the process," Digvijaya tweeted (translated from Hindi).

The Congress leader went on to claim that several BJP leaders were falling sick due to COVID-19 as the result of ignoring the norms of Sanatan Dharma. "The results of ignoring the norms of Sanatan Dharma are - all priests of Ram temple tested positive for COVID-19, death of UP Minister Kamal Rani Varun due to corona, UP BJP chief tested COVID-19 positive, Home Minister Amit Shah tested positive for COVID-19, Madhya Pradesh CM Shivraj Singh Chouhan tested positive for COVID-19, Karnataka CM Yediyurappa tested positive for COVID-19," he added.

"Lord Ram is the epicentre of faith for crores of Hindus and the PM should not play with norms and traditions of Sanatan Dharma established across thousands of years," he added.

The Congress leader further questioned the urgency of holding the foundation stone laying event in times when COVID-19 spread is prevalent across the country.

"By laying the foundation stone for Ram temple at an inauspicious hour, how many people do you want to send to the hospital Modi Ji? Yogi Ji, please explain to Modi Ji. In your presence, why are the norms and traditions of Sanatan Dharma being broken? What is your compulsion that you are allowing this to happen?" he contended.

"One more question arises. A minister of the Uttar Pradesh government died due to coronavirus. Union Home Minister tested positive for COVID-19 and Uttar Pradesh BJP chief also tested positive. In these circumstances, whether Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and India's Prime Minister should not be quarantined? Is being quarantined only mandated for common people? Not for Prime Minister and Chief Ministers? The time limit for quarantine is 14 days," he added.

He further said that the entire cabinet should go into quarantine otherwise they will infect the residents of Ayodhya.

"These people's religion is 'Hindutva' and not 'Sanatan Dharma'. hence they have nothing to do with Sanatan Dharma's traditions. They have broken all the norms. Now, Modi Ji will issue the muhurta and he will only lay the foundation stone," he tweeted.

The Prime Minister is scheduled to lay the foundation stone of the Ram temple in Ayodhya on August 5.

The construction of Ram temple will begin after the ceremony to lay the foundation stone in which Chief Ministers of several states, Ministers from the Union Cabinet and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat are also likely to participate.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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.
March 24,2020

New Delhi, Mar 24: Thirty-two states and Union Territories (UTs) have announced complete lockdown to check the spread of the coronavirus in the country, informed the Central government on Tuesday.
There is a complete lockdown in as many as 560 districts of the country affecting several hundred million people.
Earlier, the complete lockdown was imposed in 30 districts, as of now, almost the entire country is in lockdown to restrict public movement in an attempt to break the chain of transmission of coronavirus.
Three states -- Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha -- have announced lockdown in select districts with the governments continuously monitoring the situation and ready to extend the restrictions to other districts as well.
The Union Territory of Lakshadweep has announced restrictions on certain activities.
The Indian Railways has suspended all passenger train operations till March 31 in view of coronavirus.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
March 3,2020

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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.