Babri Masjid row| Sants and devotees should decide, not Supreme Court: Pejawar seer

coastaldigest.com web desk
November 2, 2018

Udupi, Nov 2: Pejawar Mutt pontiff Vishwesha Tirtha Swami has dropped a hint that he may not accept the verdict of Supreme Court judgment on Babri Masjid issue if it gives priority to history over mythology.

Speaking at a religious awareness campaign organised by Sabarimala Ayyappa Swami Samajam and Dharma Foundation at the MGM College Grounds here, the seer said that the final decision on the issue should be taken by the sants (saints) and devotees.

He stated that it would be difficult for him to accept a Supreme Court judgment if it went against the Ram Temple at Ayodhya. The Hindu sants would also oppose the judgment of the Supreme Court if it went against the Ram Temple. Hence, the decision with regard to the construction of temple in Ayodhya should be taken outside courts, he added.

Referring to the Sabarimala issue, the seer said that it would be better if the government and courts did not interfere in the matters of religion, tradition and religious practices.

The seer said that without any discrimination of caste and creed, the Sabarimala Ayyappa Temple was a centre of Hindu organisation. It was necessary to follow religion and values and give up vices to get a darshan of Ayyappa Swami.

The Kerala government should have gone on appeal on the Supreme Court verdict in the Sabarimala case. By not doing so, it had gone against the sentiments of a large number of devotees, the Pejawar seer said.

P.G. Sasikumar Varma, representative of the Pandalam Palace, Shivaram, president of the State unit of Ayyappa Seva Samaj, Ramachandra Swami of Uttara Kashi Kapilashram, Kuntar Ravish Tantri, and others were present.

Comments

Muslim Warrior
 - 
Saturday, 3 Nov 2018

show us the proof in mythology also say what the veda say about god which does not have image, idol or picture!!!

 

you build or not build we dont care, but if muslim came to power in indian will build bigges ever baber masjid.

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
January 11,2020

Bengaluru, Jan 11: India’s second-biggest IT company, Infosys Ltd, said it found no evidence of financial misconduct by its executives following a investigation into whistleblower complaints.

Bengaluru-headquartered Infosys, which earlier on Friday raised its revenue forecasts due to upbeat demand from Western clients, said an audit committee report exonerated Chief Executive Officer Salil Parekh and Chief Financial Officer Nilanjan Roy of all allegations, including accusations that the duo prevented employees from presenting data on large deals.

“I’m very happy that CEO Salil Parekh and CFO Nilanjan Roy have emerged from this stronger,” Infosys Chairman Nandan Nilekani told reporters. “The last two years since Salil has been here the company has changed dramatically for the better.”

Parekh took over as Infosys CEO in January 2018, after his predecessor Vishal Sikka quit following a public row with the company’s founder executives amid whistleblower allegations of wrongdoing.

The company earlier said it expected revenue to grow between 10 per cent and 10.5 per cent on a constant currency basis in the year ending March 2020, compared with its previous forecast of between 9 per cent and 10 per cent.

“We continue to see momentum in the market and we have an extremely robust pipeline driven by segment leaders,” CEO Parekh told a news conference.

“With the strength of large deal wins and digital momentum, we were able to clearly see that we have support to raise our guidance.”

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.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court 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
February 5,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 5: Despite installing a BJP government in Karnataka through disguised operation Kamala, the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led union government has continued its step motherly attitude towards this south Indian state.

Under the new formula adopted to share central taxes among states Karnataka will be the worst-affected. Though the 15th Finance Commission has recommended a special grant of Rs 5,495 crore for the state for 2020-21, the Centre appears reluctant to pay up and instead has asked for the proposal to be reviewed.

During the Union budget, the report of the 14th Finance Commission headed by NK Singh for 2020-21 was tabled in Lok Sabha. It shows besides Karnataka, Telangana, Mizoram and Kerala saw their central tax share decrease, while Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Maharashtra were top gainers.

Karnataka's share has decreased from 4.7% provided by the previous finance commission, to 3.6%. Acknowledging there is a steep decline in Karnataka's share from 2019-20, the finance commission has recommended a special grant of Rs 5,495 crore for the state.

Its share in 2019-20 was Rs 36,675 crore, but under the new formula, Karnataka will get only Rs 31,180 crore in 2020-21 from the divisible pool of Rs 8.5 lakh crore - a decline of 22.5%.

Also, the decrease for Karnataka comes on the back of a shortfall in 2019-20. While the state was entitled to Rs 39,806 crore from the divisible pool, it got only Rs 36,675 crore as the Centre suffered a tax revenue shortfall of Rs 1.5 lakh crore.

What is more disheartening though is the Centre's refusal to pay the special grant. Instead, the Union finance ministry has asked the finance commission to reconsider the recommendation. This has prompted the state to take up the issue with the Centre.

"The decline in central taxes devolution comes at a time when the state is going through a tough financial situation. Steps are being taken to ensure Karnataka gets justice," said chief secretary TM Vijay Bhaskar.

Officials said besides corrective measures for 2020-21, the focus will be on ensuring a fair share in subsequent years. However, Karnataka has little chance of getting its dues as the Centre is known to be prudent when distributing tax proceeds among states.

"The Centre has certain views on devolution. We have done our duty by submitting the interim report. It's up to the states to convince the Centre," said Ravi Kota, joint secretary of 15th Finance Commission.

Under the new formula, the commission changed the weightage for some of the six criteria it considers - population, area, forest cover, income distance, demographic performance and tax effort.

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.