Demand emerges for ban on sale of meat, liquor in entire Ayodhya district

Agencies
November 12, 2018

Ayodhya, Nov 12: After Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath changed the name of Faizabad district to Ayodhya, a demand for a ban on the sale of meat and liquor in the entire district has surfaced.

Speaking to ANI, Acharya Satyendra Das said that Ayodhya is a sacred place and meat and liquor was never sold in the city, adding that the proposed ban will lead to a healthier lifestyle.

"Ayodhya has been a sacred place for centuries, meat and liquor were never sold here. Now that Faizabad has been renamed as Ayodhya, the ban should be applicable to the whole district. The ban will end the impurity and pollution and evoke a feeling of purity. This ban will help people to be healthier,"

The demand has drawn support from other priests as well, one of whom, namely Dharmdas Pakshkar of Sri Hanuman Gadi Temple, has called for a ban on the sale of meat across the nation.

Meanwhile, Mohammed Iqbal Ansari, a key petitioner in the Babri Masjid case, said that the final decision will be taken by the government itself.

The proposal to ban meat and alcohol has received a mix response from the public, as the ban will directly impact owners of meat and liquor shops.

Mohammed Shahzad, who owns a meat shop, called the demand "wrong and unjustified." "This is my only source of income and if there is a ban on the sale of meat and eggs, how will we earn anything? We have families to provide for. It was fine until the rule was limited only till Ayodhya, now just because they have changed the name, doesn't mean it shall be applicable in the whole district. There are around 200-250 meat shops here, if put a ban on the sale, they should provide us with a job," he explained.

While Shahzad was against the ban, there are few shopkeepers who supported the ban. Sushil Jaiswal, a liquor shop owner, said that he supports the ban as what is right shall be done. Speaking about the losses that would be incurred, Jaiswal said, "People will find something else to earn money."

Faizabad district was renamed Ayodhya on November 6 by Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath at the Deepotsav event.

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 30,2020

New Delhi, Jun 30: The Home Ministry on Monday issued guidelines for 'Unlock 2.0' phase across country between July 1 and July 31. The report stated that COVID-19 lockdown shall continue to remain in force in containment zones till July 31. In containment zones, only essential activities to be allowed. The government's guidelines come on a day when Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu extended lockdowns in their respective states to July 31.

Unlock 2.0 Guidelines:

•   Schools, colleges, educational institutes wil remain closed till July 31. Online/distance learning shall continue to be permitted and shall be encouraged

•   Lockdown shall continue to remain in force in containment zones till July 31st.  In containment zones, only essential activities to be allowed.

•   Night Curfew shall continue to remain in force, between 10:00 pm and 5:00 am, except for essential activities and other relaxations.

•   Social/ political/ sports/ entertainment/ academic/ cultural/ religious functions and other large congregations remain prohibited.

•   International air travel, except as allowed by MHA, will also remain barred.

•   Shops depending upon their area, can have more than 5 persons at a time. However, they have to maintain adequate physical distance.

•   Training institutions of the central and state governments will be allowed to function with effect from July 15 and SOP in this regard will be issued by the Department of Personnel and Training.

Meanwhile, Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla wrote to Chief Secretaries of all states and UTs, urging them to ensure compliance of Unlock 2 guidelines and direct all concerned authorities for their strict implementation.

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
June 15,2020

Nuapada, Jun 15: In a shocking incident, a 70-year-old elderly woman had to drag her 100-year-old bedridden mother on a cot to the nearby bank to withdraw pension money of Rs 1,500.

The incident came to light after a video of the woman dragging her bedridden mother on a cot to a bank in Odisha's Nuapada district went viral on social media.

The woman from Bargaon village dragged her mother on the cot after the bank official allegedly asked for physical verification. The incident took place on June 9.

"I went to the bank several times in last three months and requested the bank official to release the pension amount. However, the official informed that they would release the pension if I bring my mother to the branch," said Punjimati Dei.

Bank manager Ajit Pradhan allegedly asked Dei to bring her bedridden mother Labhe Baghel to the bank.

Her mother is an account holder under Jan Dhan Yojana of the Central government.

The Centre had announced Rs 500 monthly assistance for women Jan Dhan bank account holders from April to June in view of the COVID-19 situation.

A district administration official informed that the woman reached the bank with her mother before the manager could visit her home for the verification.

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
June 4,2020

New Delhi, Jan 4: The Supreme Court on Thursday extended till June 12 its earlier order of May 15 asking the government not to take any coercive action against companies and employers for violation of Centre's March 29 circular for payment of full wages to employees for the lockdown period.

A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, S K Kaul and M R Shah reserved the verdict on a batch of petitions filed by various companies challenging the circular of the Ministry of Home Affairs issued on March 29 asking the employers to pay full wages to the employees during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic.

In the proceedings conducted through video conferencing, the top court said there was a concern that workmen should not be left without pay, but there may be a situation where the industry may not have money to pay and hence, the balancing has to be done.

Meanwhile, the apex court asked the parties to file their written submissions in support of their claims.

The top court on May 15 had asked the government not to take any coercive action against the companies and employers who are unable to pay full wages to their employees during the nationwide lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic.

The Centre also filed an affidavit justifying its March 29 direction saying that the employers claiming incapacity in paying salaries must be directed to furnish their audited balance sheets and accounts in the court.

The government has said that the March 29 directive was a "temporary measure to mitigate the financial hardship" of employees and workers, specially contractual and casual, during the lockdown period and the directions have been revoked by the authority with effect from May 18.

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.