Haji Ali Dargah decides to grant access to women, finally

October 24, 2016

New Delhi, Oct 24: Women will be granted access to the sanctum sanctorum of the Haji Ali shrine in Mumbai on par with men, the Dargah Trust told the Supreme Court today and sought four weeks to make the requisite infrastructural changes.

haji aliA bench comprising Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justices D Y Chandrachud and L Nageswara Rao granted time to the trust and disposed off its appeal against the Bombay High Court order asking it to give equal access to women also.

Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, appearing for the trust, said an additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Dargah trust saying it is willing to allow women inside the shrine.

The apex court, on October 17, had extended the stay granted by Bombay High Court to facilitate an appeal against its decision to lift the ban on entry of women near the sanctum sanctorum of the Dargah in Mumbai.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had expressed hope that the Trust, which had challenged the high court judgement, "will take a stand which is progressive".

Subramanium, had also assured the bench that he was on a "progressive mission" and said all holy books and scriptures promoted equality and nothing which is regressive in character should be suggested.

The bench had also remarked that "if you are not allowing both men and women to go beyond a point, there is no problem. But if you are allowing some to go beyond a point while others are not, it is a problem."

The counsel, appearing for a women's group which has challenged the practice of the Trust not to allow women near the sanctum sanctorum, had submitted that the position was different before 2011 than what it is today.

The Trust moved the apex court challenging the Bombay High Court order lifting the ban on women from entering the sanctum sanctorum of the renowned Muslim shrine in South Mumbai.

The High Court on August 26 had held that the ban imposed by the Trust on women from entering the sanctum sanctorum of the Haji Ali Dargah, contravened Articles 14, 15 and 25 of the Constitution and said women should be permitted to enter the sanctum sanctorum like men.

The High Court had allowed a PIL filed by two women, Zakia Soman and Noorjehan Niaz, from NGO Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, challenging the ban on women's entry into the sanctum sanctorum of the dargah from 2012.

It had granted a six-week stay on the order on a request by the Dargah Trust to enable it to appeal before the Supreme Court.

The high court had held that the Trust had no power to alter or modify the mode or manner of religious practices of any individual or any group.

The High Court in its 56-page judgement had also noted that the "right to manage the Trust cannot override the right to practice religion itself".

It had said the trust has not been able to justify the ban legally or otherwise. Hence it cannot be said that the prohibition was an essential and integral part of Islam and whether taking away that part of the practice would result in a fundamental change in the character of the religion or belief.

It had also refused to accept the Trust's justification that the ban was imposed for safety and security of women, in particular, to prevent sexual harassment at places of worship.

The Trust had claimed that the ban was in keeping with an order of the Supreme Court wherein stringent directions have been issued to ensure that there is no sexual harassment to women at places of worship.

The court had noted that the aims, objectives and activities of the Haji Ali Dargah Trust were not governed by any custom or tradition and held that it was a public charitable trust and hence, open to people all over the world, irrespective of their caste, creed or gender.

The Maharashtra government had earlier told the court that women should be barred from entering the inner sanctorum of Haji Ali Dargah only if it is so enshrined in the Quran.

Comments

Syed
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

Performing Dargah Pooja is unpardonable sin in Islam.

Rashid
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

visiting these graves (darghas) either by men or women is against islamic belief ... whatever the decision , won't make any difference to community

Abdul
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

Wrong Number!..
Worship creator, not his creation.

Rikaz
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

Abbiya, you misunderstood about the concept of performing umrah and Haj....visiting grave of anyone is not allowed and which is prohibited for ladies....performing umrah or haj is religious duty....once in a life time if a Muslim financially strong enough is bound to perform these religious obligations.,,,,

Well Wisher
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

The last paragraph is so funny. Maharashtra Govt. was right. \Aaneye illaandmyake Ambaari ellind bantu kanawwa?\" There is nothing mentioned in the Qur'an about Dargah. In fact, Dargah & Durgah are the 2 faces of the same coin. Idol worship is major sin (Shirk) in Islam. Prophet also denied women's entry to the grave yard. I request MH govt to completely shut the dargah. It is just a money making, sexual harassment center. No relation with Islam. It is nothing but a Mafia."

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
February 9,2020

Tumkur, Feb 9: A special puja was performed at the Durga Parameshwari temple and the Shaneshwara temple in Karnataka's Rangana Halli village to save people from coronavirus.

Yashwanth Shastri, a priest, said: "We performed this special puja on Friday to save the world from virus and diseases like corona and H1N1."

"Our ancestors used to perform a special puja for the betterment of society and save the world from viruses when they attacked," he said.

Coronavirus originated in China's Wuhan city in December last year and has since spread to various cities around the world.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has declared the coronavirus outbreak as a global health crisis.

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 4,2020

Bengaluru,  Aug 4: Karnataka has seen a substantial increase in COVID-19 recovery rate, which was 5.67 per cent in the last week, state Medical Education Minister Dr. K Sudhakar said.

"Every day there is an increase in recovery rate which is higher by 9.17 per cent in Bengaluru city. The overall recovery rate of the state by Sunday evening was 42.81 per cent and it is 35.14 per cent in Bengaluru," the Minister wrote in a tweet.

Minister Sudhakar also directed officials to resolve the issue raised by a woman who had written to him about her struggle to take possession of the body of her father in St. Johns hospital, Madivala.

The hospital she claimed was charging money to hand over the body.

"It is inhuman on part of the hospital to refuse handover of the body. I came to know about this incident in the media and responded immediately to help out the woman," Dr. Sudhakar wrote in his tweet.

Karnataka has so far reported 74,598 active COVID-19 cases, according to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

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.
News Network
May 21,2020

Mangaluru, May 21: The Supreme Court has awarded Rs 7.64 crore compensation to the next of kin of a man who was killed in a crash-landing of Air India Express Flight 812 from Dubai in Mangalore on May 22, 2010. The accident killed 158 out of 166 passengers on board.

The family of the 45-year-old Mahendra Kodkany, which include his wife, daughter and son, were earlier granted Rs 7.35 crore as compensation by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). This compensation will now get enhanced after adding 9 per cent interest per annum (on the amount yet to be paid), to be paid by Air India.

Kodkany was the regional director for the Middle East for a UAE-based company. The aircraft overshot the runway and went down a hillside and burst into flames.

A bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi said: "The total amount payable on account of the aforesaid heads works out to Rs 7,64,29,437. Interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum shall be paid on the same basis as has been awarded by the NCDRC. The balance, if any, that remains due and payable to the complainants, after giving due credit for the amount which has already been paid, shall be paid within a period of two months."

The apex court noted that in a claim for compensation arising out of the death of an employee, the income has to be assessed on the basis of the entitlement of the employee. The top court said: "We are unable to accept the reasons which weighed with the NCDRC in making a deduction of AED (UAE currency) 30,000 from the total CTC. Similarly, and for the same reason, we are unable to accept the submission of Air India that the transport allowance should be excluded. The bifurcation of the salary into diverse heads may be made by the employer for a variety of reasons."

The top court observed that the deceased was evidently, a confirmed employee of his employer. "We have come to the conclusion that thirty per cent should be allowed on account of future prospects", added the court.

The top court noted that if the amount which has been paid by Air India is in excess of the payable under the present judgement, "we direct under Article 142 of the Constitution (discretionary powers) that the excess shall not be recoverable from the claimants," said the court.

Comments

A.Rahman
 - 
Friday, 22 May 2020

First of all  A Salute To Lawyer One Who Handled This Case Against Carriers Mismanagement Wrong Action.

 

Sure this is the second victory for the lawyer against arriers mismanagement.

 

Over all it is the sign  of a profesional ; qualified  eligble  lawyers efforts and right decision from a capable knowlegable judge. Suit case operating lawyers cannot handle such specilized cases.

They lawyer may handled rest of the vicitms cases or he not. But for his siincere efforts for the past ten years delcares whatn he  is. Am personally met him and  witnessed his court appearance  hope and wish him all the best and success .

 

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.