Nithyananda sacked as Madurai mutt pontiff

October 20, 2012

nitya


Madurai, October 19: Controversial self-styled godman Nithyananda was on Friday sacked by the senior pontiff as his successor of a 1,500-year old Saivaite mutt here, an appointment which had attracted widespread condemnation from various quarters including Tamil Nadu Government.

 

Nithyananda is facing criminal charges, including rape, in Karnataka where his ashram near Bangalore was recently embroiled in a controversy after a US-based woman and some others alleged sexual exploitation, a charge he has denied.

 

Sri Arunagirinathar, the 292nd head of Madurai Adheenam, who had named Nithyananda as his successor to the highly revered mutt in April last, showed the door to him as pressure mounted from the state government and other Hindu mutts and outfits besides devotees against the appointment.The move came a day after the state Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment department moved a local court seeking removal of Arunagirinathar himself and opposed Nithyananda's appointment holding it violated rules and mutt traditions.Incidentally, during the day, the Madras High Court reserved orders on a bunch of petitions seeking removal of Nithyananda. Asked why Nithyananda was sacked, Arunagirinathar, who had earlier defended his action, said "You know better. I have sought police help because I feel my life is threatened due to the stay of the disciples of Nithyananda (in the mutt here)."

 

The seer told police that he was facing a threat from the disciples of Nithyananda after his sacking. Disciples of Nithyanandha who were staying in the mutt also came out. Nithyananda's controversial appointment led to strong protests from the mutt disciples who opposed him on the ground that he was unfit as he faced serious criminal charges including sex scandal and filed petitions in courts.The self-styled godman had first courted controversy after TV channels telecast sleazy visuals purportedly showing him in a compromising positition with a Tamil actress, leading to his arrest in 2010. He was subsequently released on bail.

 

In its plea before the sub-court, HR and CE Commissioner has sought removal of Arunagirinathan as the head of mutt charging that he had failed to perform his duty and had formed a trust along with Nithyananda with the ulterior motive of selling the mutt properties, worth several hundreds of crores.This is the second time Arunagirinathar is sacking a junior Pontiff. He had dismissed a young boy whom he had appointed as the Junior pontiff two years ago.

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.
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

  • 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
April 14,2020

Mumbai, Apr 14: The Shiv Sena and NCP said Prime Minister Narendra Modis address to the nation on Tuesday lacked substance as he did not suggest ways to strengthen the economy or a relief package for the poor and those worst hit by the lockdown.

Shiv Sena spokesperson Manisha Kayande also took a dig at the prime minister, saying he thankfully did not give any activity to people this time like clanging utensils or lighting lamps.

Modi on Tuesday announced that the lockdown across the country will be extended till May 3, saying the measure has produced a significant outcome in containing the infection.

He said implementation of the lockdown will be strictly ensured in its second phase and detailed guidelines will be brought out on Wednesday to ensure that outbreak does not spread to new areas.

Some relaxations may be allowed after April 20 in places where there are no hotspots, he said.

Kayande said Modi could have announced extension of the lockdown on Wednesday itself along with the new guidelines, instead of declaring it separately.

"He could have elaborated steps to be taken to tackle the coronavirus, relaxing restrictions on movements in different areas (depending upon threat posed by the disease)," she said.

"His speech normally is more of a rhetoric than substance. Thankfully, he did not give any other event to the people like lighting up lamps or clanging utensils. There was nothing substantial (in the address), the only takeaway was that the lockdown has been extended, she added.

Maharashtra Minister and NCP national spokesman Nawab Malik noted that Modi talked about helping the poor.

"But, he could have announced a package on behalf of the central government to help the poor, those working in the unorganised sector who are the worst hit due to the lockdown.

There was no mention of it anywhere," Malik said.

Another NCP spokesman Mahesh Tapase said it was expected that the prime minister would address the economic concerns being faced by the country.

"The least to expect was the announcement of a slew of measures to kick-start the economy in a phased manner as and when the restrictions are lifted, he added.

Tapase said the employers and employees wanted to know from the government how recession and unemployment will be tackled in the time to come.

"Access to capital for business, especially for MSMEs and agriculture, is a big concern. Supply and logistics is the cornerstone of economic activity which has come to a virtual standstill," he said.

The 2020-21 fiscal looks grim and hence, the right stimulus from the government coupled with a renewed zeal by the industry will only bring the economy back on track, he suggested.

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 web desk
June 16,2020

New Delhi, Jun 16: Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government’s attempt to downplay the border dispute with China, matters have heated up unprecedentedly along the Line of Actual Control (LAC)- the effective Sino-India border in Eastern Ladakh. 

The country has lost three precious lives – an army officer and two soldiers. The last time blood was spilled on the LAC, before the latest episode, was 45 years ago when the Chinese ambushed an Assam Rifles patrol in Tulung La.

India had lost four soldiers on October 20, 1975 in Tulung La, the last time bullets were fired on the India-China border though both the countries witnessed bitter stand-offs later at Sumdorong Chu valley in 1987, Depsang in 2013, Chumar in 2014 and Doklam in 2017.

Between 1962 and 1975, the biggest clash between India and China took place in Nathu La pass in 1967 when reports suggest that around 80 Indian soldiers were killed and many more Chinese personnel.

While three soldiers, including a Commanding Officer, were killed in the latest episode in Galwan Valley, the government describes it as a "violent clash" and does not mention opening fire.

New Delhi described the locality where the 1975 incident took place as "well within" its territory only to be rebuffed by Beijing as "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong".

The Ministry of External Affairs had then said that the Chinese had crossed the LAC and ambushed the soldiers while Beijing claimed the Indians entered their territory and did not return despite warnings.

The Indian government maintained that the ambush on the Assam Rifles' patrol in 1975 took place "500 metres south of Tulung" on the border between India and Tibet and "therefore in Indian territory". It said Chinese soldiers "penetrating" Indian territory implied a "change in China's position" on the border question but the Chinese denied this and blamed India for the incident.

The US diplomatic cables quoted an Indian military intelligence officer saying that the Chinese had erected stone walls on the Indian side of Tulung La and from these positions fired several hundred rounds at the Indian patrol.

"Four of the Indians had gone into a leading position while two (the ones who escaped) remained behind. The senior military intelligence officer emphasised that the soldiers on the Indian patrol were from the area and had patrolled that same region many times before," the cable said.

One of the US cables showed that former US Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger sought details of the October 1975 clash "without approaching the host governments on actual location of October 20 incident". He also wanted to know what ground rules were followed regarding the proximity of LAC by border patrols.

A cable sent from the US mission in India on November 4, 1975 appeared to have doubts about the Chinese account saying it was "highly defensive".

"Given the unsettled situation on the sub-continent, particularly in Bangladesh, both Chinese and Indian authorities have authorised stepped up patrols along the disputed border. The clash may well have ensued when two such patrols unexpectedly encountered each other," it said.

Another cable from China on the same day quoted another October 1974 cable, which spoke about Chinese officials being concerned for long that "some hotheaded person on the PRC (People's Republic of China) might provoke an incident that could lead to renewed Sino-Indian hostilities. It went on to say that this clash suggested that "such concerns and apprehensions are not unwarranted".

According to the United States diplomatic cables, Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 3, 1975 disputed the statement of the MEA spokesperson, who said the incident took place inside Indian territory.

The Chinese had said "sheer reversal of black and white and confusion of right and wrong". In its version of the 1975 incident, they said Indian troops crossed the LAC at 1:30 PM at Tulung Pass on the Eastern Sector and "intruded" into their territory when personnel at the Civilian Checkpost at Chuna in Tibet warned them to withdraw.

Ignoring this, they claimed, Indian soldiers made "continual provocation and even opened fire at the Chinese civilian checkpost personnel, posing a grave threat to the life of the latter. The Chinese civilian checkpost personnel were obliged to fire back in self defence."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson had also said they told the Indian side that they could collect the bodies "anytime" and on October 28, collected the bodies, weapons and ammunition and "signed a receipt".

The US cables from the then USSR suggested that the official media carried reports from Delhi on the October 1975 incident and they cited only Indian accounts of the incident "ridiculing alleged Chinese claims that the Indians crossed the line and opened fire first".

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.