|| Satyameva Jayate ||

Devoted to “Bharat” and “Dharma”

Of Subsidies and Politics of “Secularism”

I stumbled on this completely by chance over the weekend. Does anyone know what happened to the PIL referred to in the report below?

***

SC stays HC restraint on Haj subsidy (Excerpts; emphasis mine)

19 Sep 2006, Dhananjay Mahapatra,TNN

NEW DELHI: The UPA government’s ’secular’ credentials came in for embarrassing scrutiny on Monday with Supreme Court interrogating the Centre on whether secularism, a basic feature of the Constitution, allowed it to grant largesse for the annual Haj pilgrimage.

Though a Bench comprising Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal and Justices A R Lakshamanan and C K Thakker asked the uncomfortable question, which could provide fodder to opposition BJP, it granted immediate relief to the Centre by staying the Allahabad High Court’s interim order restraining the government from subsidising the Haj pilgrimage.

…The Bench made it clear that the stay of the August 25 order of the HC was only for the November Haj as the Centre is in an advanced stage of preparations, including a series of steps having national and international repercussions.

It also asked the HC to expeditiously hear and decide, preferably before next year’s Haj pilgrimage, a PIL filed by a Shiv Sena activist way back in 1995 seeking a direction to the Centre to stop subsidies for all religious pilgrimages.

When solicitor general G E Vahanvati began arguments assailing the interim order of the HC, the Bench cited the constitutional provision mandating the government not to discriminate on the basis of religion.

“What happened to this secular principle enshrined in the Constitution which the government is bound to follow? Do you subsidise travel of pilgrims to Kumbh melas organised every six or 12 years?” asked the Bench.

Vahanvati cited the examples of the annual Mansarovar and Sabarimala Yatra. He was immediately contradicted by Justice Lakshamanan, who said that he is not aware of any subsidy for the Sabarimala pilgrimage though he was in charge of the temple for some time.

The Bench said providing special trains would not come under the subsidy category as the passengers pay for their travel.

It asked: “The Kumbh mela takes place once every six or 12 years. Except for making provisions for maintaining law and order and hygiene, tell us whether the Centre gives concessions in terms of fares in trains or buses.”

***

Full story here: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2004091.cms

Related Posts:

Another fine example of pseudo-secularism and

“Pseudo-secularism” at its best?

November 27th, 2007 Posted by B Shantanu | Impact of Islam on India, Politics and Governance in India, Politics of Minority Appeasement | 5 comments

« Previous | Next »

5 Comments »

  1. Govt offers to provide subsidy to all pilgrimage. This is a gimmics from the congress party to circumvent the PIL.
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Govt_ready_to_subsidise_all_pilgrimages/articleshow/1911440.cms

    There is another new PIL registered against the govt for the same reason
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Haj_subsidy_Allahabad_HC_asks_Centre_to_file_counter_affidavit/articleshow/2546325.cms

    Comment by Nanda | November 27, 2007

  2. http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01092002/0109200276.htm
    Haj subsidy - fact or fiction
    By Maasoom Moradabadi

    http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/15092002/1509200242.htm
    Haj subsidy is a fact and must go eventually
    By Syed Shahabuddin

    I found these two articles in Milli Gazette. They give different but interesting points of view on this subject of subsidy.
    An important point missed by both authors is that the Government appropriates income from all the major temples in India.
    Mr. Shahabuddin says “Assuming Rs.32,000 to be the Haj Charter fare and 72,000 pilgrims, the total transaction comes to Rs.230.4 crores. We know that in our country every transaction generates a Commission, an under-the-table payment. 5% will amount to more than 11.5 crores!”
    I feel he is right. Secularism is only an excuse, vote bank may be an attraction, but money is the real cause and driving force. Our legislators are shrewd enough to take corrective action in case the Court delivers an unfavourable judgment. No one willingly kills a milch cow.

    Comment by Nandan | November 27, 2007

  3. @ Nanda: Thanks for the links. Gimmick indeed…I was not aware of the other PIL.

    ***

    @ Nandan: Thanks for the article link…I will have a look at both the articles later on.

    Comment by B Shantanu | November 27, 2007

  4. “Govt offers to provide subsidy to all pilgrimage.”…

    Govt only provide subsidy to muslims for going to Mecca.

    Supreme Court clearly said (ref. Shantanu’s posting):. No subsidy, not even a Rupee, is offered to Hindus to go to Manassarowar or Sabarimala or Kumbh Mela etc. What govt does is faciliate the transportation. That is not subsidy. Every hindu pilgrim pay the full transportation cost for the visit.

    Haj subsidy will go on, and pseudo-secular govt will increase the amount every year. No matter, no muslim countries offer such subsidy or it is unholy to take money from the govt (Hindu money) to go for Haj.

    What is the way out to stop Haj subsidy or to make everyone equal? There is only one way, which BJP-NDA govt falied to do. Govt must offer Rs. 4000 crores subsidy for HIndu pilgrimages, and to jains, sikhs, buddhists, chrsitians as per their proportion.

    BJP wanted only HIndu votes, but not doing anything for them. Vajpayee increased the amount of Haj subsidy and promosed to create 2 lakhs Urdu teachers jobs if voted to power (said in 2004 Loksabha election time). But he had no guts and imagination to offer subsidy to Hindu pilgrimages.

    There are millions of hindus in different parts of the country who can never think to visit Hardwar, Varanasi, Somnath/Dwarakadhesh mandir, or Tirupati etc (keep aside Mansarowar). Once, I had a visit to Hardwar (not for pilgrimage but for other purpose) and when I visited my village, hundreds of villagers came to see me. They told me, they can never think to visit such places; by seeing me they will earn Punya. They are realists, they know the hard truth. But why these poor HIndus can’t visit a Tirtha-shetra in their own country? Why there is no subsidy for them? When a poor and illiterate muslim can make pilgrimage to a far-away another country, why a poor hindu can’t make it inside the country?

    Religious subsidy must be for all. Else it must go. If muslims get Rs. 500 crores, HIndus must be given Rs.4000 crores. Only BJP can do that and I am sure they will get millions more Hindu votes. BJP has not matured yet to consolidate Hindu votes. They think lip service and slogans will bring them Hindu votes.

    Comment by Bharat | November 28, 2007

  5. From The Hindu: SC admits petition challenging subsidy for Haj pilgrims

    New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday admitted a petition questioning the constitutional validity of a legislation providing annual financial assistance to Muslims going on the Haj.

    A Bench comprising Justices R V Raveendran and L S Panta issued notice to the Centre on the petition challenging the Haj Committee Act, 1959 providing special subsidy to the Muslim community for the pilgrimage.

    The petition filed by Prafull Goradia, a former BJP MP, alleged that the estimated Rs 280 crore annually incurred by the Government for funding the Haj pilgrimage was not only unconstitutional but a drain on the tax payers’ money.

    He contended that the provision for special subsidy to Muslims, without any similar assistance to others like Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and Sikhs, was violative of the Constitution as the State cannot discriminate between the citizens on the grounds of religion, caste or creed.

    The petition has quoted various provisions of the Constitution, including Article 27, which provided, “that no person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated for the payment of expenses for the promotion and maintenance of any particular religion or religious denominance…”

    The special financial assistance to the Haj pilgrims from the tax payers’ money was discriminatory as no such facilities were being extended to Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs and other communities.

    The petitioner argued that other communities too had their own special pilgrim places located in Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Vatican, Japan, Cambodia and elsewhere but no such financial assistance was being extended to them.

    Comment by B Shantanu | July 28, 2008

Leave a comment