Taj Mahal belongs to Lord Shiva; rename it as Taj Mandir: BJP MP Vinay Katiyar

News Network
October 24, 2017

Ayodhya, Oct 24: The controversy over Taj Mahal refuses to die down any time soon, and now BJP leader Vinay Katiyar has asked the authorities to rename the iconic historic monument located in Agra as Taj Mandir.

The firebrand BJP MP on Tuesday said that nothing is wrong in it as the whole compound belongs to Lord Shiva.

It was a temple earlier, Katiyar added.

Katiyar made these remarks after some activists belonging to Hindu outfit Hindu Yuva Vahini were arrested for reciting 'Shiv Chalisa' inside the premises of the Taj Mahal on Monday.

The incident triggered tension and the activists were formally arrested by the local police. They were released only after they submitted a written apology.

The MP had last week claimed that the Mughal mausoleum was actually a Hindu temple.

Kaityar said that the Taj Mahal was known as 'Tejo Mahal' and had a shivling, which was later removed from the monument.

“It was Tejo Mahal, Lord Shiva’s temple, where Shahjahan buried his wife and turned it into a mausoleum,” Katiyar, who had been in the forefront of the Ram temple movement of Ayodhya, had claimed.

“It was constructed by Hindu kings, the rooms and carvings there prove that it was a Hindu monument… it has also been termed as one by historian PN Oak,” he claimed.

The firebrand BJP lawmaker said like a Shiva temple, water drips from the ceiling in the Taj Mahal, which is not a case in any mausoleum anywhere and is like that only on a Shivlinga.

“It was a famous monument and was grabbed by Shahjahan,” Katiyar said.

“It was our temple but was made a mausoleum as they had more power. But it is a grand monument and national heritage… people come to see it and so it should be kept safe and secure,” he said.

Last week, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath gave a clear snub to his BJP colleague and MLA Sangeet Som for stirring the Taj Mahal controversy, stating that "it does not matter who built it and for what reason; it was built by blood and sweat of Indian labourers".

Som had courted controversy on Sunday, stating that the iconic Taj Mahal was built by traitors and hence, cannot be included in the Indian history.

Taj Mahal was also recently omitted from the UP Government's Tourism Booklet. However, the Taj Mahal later found a place of pride in the 2018 calender brought out by the Uttar Pradesh government.

Comments

khasai Khane
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

Tajmahal is a diversion topic. Look for what they're actually trying to hide with this.

 

BTW, 

 

Tajmahal is a grave of Mumtaz, wife of Shajahan. Islamic ruling is to level the graves to the ground/one hand span, regardless of who the person is - a prophet, a sahaba, or any modern day jaahil. Now this Tajmahal is basically a grave, a dargah, and a dargah not of auliya allah!

We should take this suggestion of BJP/Sangh parivar seriously and appreciate it coz any such durga/dargah should be demolished, or would have been demolished if the Sahaba were ruling us.!

 

 

If you think this is only an attack on Muslim history, well this shouldn't have been a part of a true islamic empire in the first place. Secondly, we show our strength in knowledge, education, serving the people etc.. 

 

Thafseer
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

This is just their propaganda to divert people mind from Shah Company issue to Taj Mahal. This is their plan people can forget Shah Company scam, But We don’t.

Imran
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

who is Vinay katiyar ? he is  just  barking but nothing will happen.

Indian
 - 
Tuesday, 24 Oct 2017

There it comes!!!!

 

 

shameless Fellows

 

shareef
 - 
Tuesday, 24 Oct 2017

This belongs to his father.

Junc rotten egg of BJP circus.

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
March 11,2020

New Delhi, Mar 11: According to the Union health ministry, there are 62 confirmed cases of coronavirus in the country.

The Delhi High Court Wednesday sought the stand of the Centre and the Delhi government on a PIL seeking proper and adequate measures to combat coronavirus.

A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar issued notice to the Ministry of Health and the Delhi government seeking their replies on the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate.

The petition, by lawyer Triveni Potekar, seeks directions to the Centre and the Delhi government to make available important and relevant information on access to and availability of medical facilities for testing and treatment for the coronavirus disease.

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 29,2020

New Delhi, Jun 29: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Central government to find out the facts related to blacklisting and canceling of visas of foreign nationals who attended the congregation of Tablighi Jamaat in Nizamuddin area here.

A three-judge bench headed by Justice AM Khanwilkar and also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna asked the Centre to find out the facts related to the matter and fixed it for further hearing on July 2.

The apex court asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta "if visas of these foreigners are canceled, then why are they still in India?"

"You (Centre) can deport them. If visas are not canceled, then, it is a different situation," the court said. The top court was hearing a number of petitions challenging blacklisting and cancellation of visas filed by few foreigners.

Mehta sought more time to file a reply on the matter, after which the court posted the matter for further hearing on July 2.

The petitions, filed by the foreign nationals from 35 countries, have sought directions to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to remove their names from the blacklist, reinstate their visas and facilitate their return to their respective countries.

The petitions sought to declare the decision of the MHA of blacklisting the foreign nationals who attended the Tablighi Jamaat congregation as "arbitrary".

"Unilateral blacklisting of 960 foreigners by the Home Ministry vide press release dated April 2, 2020, and the subsequent blacklisting of around 2500 foreigners as reported on June 4, 2020, is in violation of Article 21. Therefore, it is void and unconstitutional as the petitioners have neither been provided any hearing nor notice or intimation in this regard," the plea said.

One of the petitioners named Fareedah Cheema, a Thai national in the seventh month of her pregnancy, said she was quarantined in March, like other foreign nationals but was released from quarantine only in late May and is still at a facility under restricted movements, without the avenue to go back to her home nation and experience the birth of her child with security and dignity, with her loved ones.

These foreign nationals presently in India were blacklisted for a period of 10 years from traveling to India for their alleged involvement in Tablighi Jamaat activities.

The Home Ministry had said that foreign Tablighi Jamaat members, who were staying in India in violation of visa rules during the nationwide lockdown implemented to combat the COVID-19 spread, have been blacklisted.
A large congregation organised by Tablighi Jamaat in the national capital in March had emerged as a major COVID-19 hotspot in the country.

The government had said the decision of banning the foreign Tablighi Jamaat members was taken after details of foreigners found illegally living in mosques and religious places emerged from various states across the country.

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 12,2020

An Indian national was killed and four others injured in alleged firing by Nepal police personnel along the India-Nepal border in Bihar's Sitamarhi district today.

Sources said the firing took place after a clash between the Indians and personnel of Nepal police at the Lalbandi-Janki Nagar border in Pipra Parsain panchayat under Sonebarsha police station of the district.

Jitendra Kumar, the additional director general of police (headquarters), confirmed the death and injuries. The place of firing falls under Nepal jurisdiction.

Locals said Vikesh Kumar Rai, 25, died on the spot and Umesh Ram and Uday Thakur received bullet injuries when they were working in an agricultural field. Another person, Lagan Rai, is said to have been detained by the Nepali police.

Injured persons were rushed to Sitamarhi Sadar Hospital for better treatment.

Vikesh Kumar Rai’s father, Nageshwar Rai, said that his agriculture land falls under Narayanpur in Nepal where his son was working.

On May 17, Nepal police had fired blank rounds to disperse dozens of Indians trying to cross the border. It was not clear if they were also farmers.

The district magistrate and the superintendent of police of Sitamarhi have rushed to the spot.

Nepal shares a 1,850-kilometre (1,150-mile) open border with India and people travel across it for work and to visit family. It had closed its international borders on March 22 amid the coronavirus pandemic.

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.