Is Jammu and Kashmir Omar Abdullah’s parental estate? RSS hits back over Article 370

May 28, 2014

Srinagar, May 28: The controversy over Article 370 continued unabated on Wednesday with the RSS hitting back at Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah for his remarks. Omar made it clear that it cannot be revoked without recalling the Constituent Assembly and that it is “impossible”.

Reacting to Omar’s remarks that either J&K won’t be part of India or Article 370 that grants special status to the state will still exist, senior RSS leader Ram Madhav said the state will always be an integral part of India with or without the provision. Madhav also asked whether the chief minister thought the state was his “parental estate”.

“J&K won’t be part of India? Is Omar thinking it’s his parental estate? 370 or no 370, J&K has been and always will be an integral part of India,” tweeted Madhav.

Observing that any move to abrogate Article 370 will be extremely dangerous, Omar said if the BJP decides to recall the constitutional facility, it would reopen the debate on state’s accession to India. He said the only way to revoke Article 370 is on the back of the body called the Constituent Assembly.

This is the body that ratified the relationship of J&K with India, he said, adding that if you were to recall the Constituent Assembly, you would be reopening the debate on Instrument of Accession. “If the BJP wants to do that and call the Constituent Assembly, let them do that,” he said.

The chief minister said that considering we claim that entire J&K is ours and the BJP’s view that even the PoK is India’s part, the Constituent Assembly will have to have members from there too. “But this is highly impossible. Who is going to recall a Constituent Assembly?” Omar asked.

A fresh controversy over Article 370 erupted on Tuesday following comments by the new Minister of State in Prime Minister’s Office Jitendra Singh seeking debate on it. “If we do not have debate and discussion, how would you be able to tell those who have been unable to understand what they have been deprived of on account of Article 370?” said Singh.

He later clarified that he was “misquoted” on the issue. Reacting to Madhav’s “parental estate” remarks, Omar asserted that he never said J&K has been his parental estate, but he was a citizen of the state and he had the right to speak about his rights. Omar said he doesn’t owe allegiance to the RSS and that no RSS wala can stop him from speaking for his state.

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.

‘Pay the worker before his sweat dries’: Madras High Court cites Prophet Muhammad’s teaching while ordering settlement of dues

News Network

December 21,2025

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