ASI stopping Muslims from offering namaz in Taj Mahal, unjustified: Clerics

Agencies
November 7, 2018

Muslim clerics Sajid Rashidi, and Mufti Mukarram on Tuesday said, Archaeological Survey of India prohibiting Muslims from offering namaz at the mosque located inside the Taj Mahal is unjustified.

The Muslim clerics also dubbed the ban as wrong and said the order violates their fundamental rights.

The Archaeological Survey of India on Monday imposed a ban on the people belonging to the Muslim community from offering namaz at the mosque located inside Taj Mahal on all days, except for Friday.

Speaking to ANI, president of the All India Imam Federation, Sajid Rashidi said, "The decision by the ASI is wrong, and they cannot have such double standards. In Delhi, they have around 123 properties, and within those 123 properties there are several mosques, they even wrote a letter to the Wakf board asking them to appoint imams in those mosques."

"What are these double standards? And why did they choose this particular time for coming out with such an order? All these government institutions, be it the CBI, RBI, etc.. all of them are under pressure. All this is being done to create a rift between Hindus and Muslims," he added.

Echoing similar sentiments, Muslim cleric Mufti Mukarram said, "ASI's decision is wrong and unjustified, there is no explanation for it. People have been peacefully offering namaz there since a very long time, without any problems. Mosques are built to offer prayers, and it is our fundamental right given to us by the constitution. ASI shall take back their order with immediate effect.

Comments

Good man
 - 
Thursday, 8 Nov 2018

in india HINDU & MUSLIM are used as goat by rich & corrupt people...i hope one day we both live happly together. in sha Allah

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
December 21,2025

hadith.jpg

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.

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.