SC’s 1993 order to pay remuneration to imams is in ‘violation of Constitution’: Information commissioner

By PTI

NEW DELHI: The Central Information Commission has mentioned the 1993 Supreme Court order permitting remuneration to imams in mosques was in “violation of the Constitution” and moreover setting a “wrong precedent”, has turn into a degree of pointless political slugfest and social disharmony.

Information Commissioner Uday Mahurkar, whereas listening to an RTI utility filed by an activist demanding particulars of salaries to imams by the Delhi authorities and the Delhi Waqf Board, additionally noticed that the order violated constitutional provisions that say “tax payers money will not be used to favour any particular religion”.

The Supreme Court in 1993 on a petition from the All India Imam Organisation had directed the waqf board to present remuneration to imams in mosques managed by it.

He has directed {that a} copy of his order be despatched to the Union regulation minister with appropriate motion to make sure enforcement of provisions of articles 25 to twenty-eight of the Constitution in letter and spirit to maintain all religions on par when it comes to month-to-month remuneration to clergymen of various religions at the price of the general public exchequer — each central and states — and likewise different issues.

“Further with regard to the judgment by the Supreme Court in the case between the ‘All India Imam Organisation and vs Union Of India And Ors’ on 13 May, 1993, that opened the doors to special financial benefits from public treasury to only imams and muezzins in mosques, the commission observes that the highest court of the country in passing this order acted in violation of the provisions of the Constitution, particularly Article 27, which says tax payers money will not be used to favour any particular religion,” Mahurkar mentioned.

“The commission notes that the said judgment sets a wrong precedent in the country and has become a point of unnecessary political slugfest and also social disharmony in the society,” the data commissioner mentioned.

He additionally directed the Delhi Waqf Board to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to RTI activist Subhash Agrawal for the lack of time and assets in chasing the response to his utility.

The activist was not having the ability to get a passable response to his utility.

“It is necessary to go into the history when it comes to giving special religious benefits to the Muslim community by the State. A religious (Islamic) nation Pakistan was born out of the demand of a section of Indian Muslims for partition of India along religious lines. Despite Pakistan choosing to be a religious (Islamic) nation, India chose a Constitution guaranteeing equal rights to all religions,” Mahurkar mentioned.

“It is necessary to note here that it was the policy of giving special benefits to the Muslim community before 1947 that played a key role in encouraging pan-Islamic and fissiparous tendencies in a section of Muslims, ultimately leading to the nation’s partition,” he mentioned.

So giving remuneration to imams and others solely in mosques, quantities to “not just betraying the Hindu community and members of other non-Muslim minority religions, but also encouraging pan-Islamist tendencies amongst a section of Indian Muslims which are already visible”, the data commissioner mentioned.

Steps akin to giving particular non secular advantages to the Muslim group solely just like the one taken up within the current matter, the truth is, severely impacts interfaith concord as they invite contempt for the Muslims as a complete from a bit of extremely nationalist inhabitants, Mahurkar mentioned.

He mentioned the Delhi Waqf Board (DWB) will get an annual grant of round Rs 62 crore from the Delhi authorities whereas its personal month-to-month revenue from unbiased sources is simply round Rs 30 lakh.

“So the monthly honorarium of Rs 18,000 and Rs 16,000 being given to the imams and muezzins of DWB mosques in Delhi is being paid by the Delhi government virtually from the tax payers money which in turn is in sharp contrast with the example quoted by the appellant in which the priest of a Hindu temple is getting a paltry Rs 2,000 per month from the trust controlling the said temple,” he mentioned.

Mahurkar mentioned those that justify such steps within the title of safety to spiritual minorities increase a query that if a selected non secular minority has a proper to safety, the bulk group too has a proper to safety in a multi-religious nation the place it’s incumbent that the rights of the members of all religions are protected equally within the curiosity of inter-faith concord and unity of the nation.

He mentioned Delhi Waqf Board initially denied salaries to imams however later in a revised reply mentioned it’s only an honorarium not a wage.

“The commission observes that there was a clear attempt to hide the information in the initial period by a play of words which showed complete lack of transparency on the part of the respondent authorities in a case which in turn affects the provisions of the Constitution, and also social harmony and uniform applicability of laws for all religions in keeping with the constitutional direction that citizens of all religions be treated equally,” he mentioned.

Mahurkar directed the Delhi Waqf Board and workplace of Delhi Chief Minister to supply responses to the RTI utility of Agrawal.

The orders of the fee, the very best physique to determine appeals and complaints below the RTI Act, are sometimes challenged in excessive courts by writ petitions.

The authorities by an modification within the RTI Act had diluted perks, salaries and tenure of knowledge commissioners from being on par with central election commissioners or to that of bureaucrats serving at their pay scale.

The mounted tenure of 5 years given to an info Commissioner within the RTI Act was additionally lowered to 3 years.

NEW DELHI: The Central Information Commission has mentioned the 1993 Supreme Court order permitting remuneration to imams in mosques was in “violation of the Constitution” and moreover setting a “wrong precedent”, has turn into a degree of pointless political slugfest and social disharmony.

Information Commissioner Uday Mahurkar, whereas listening to an RTI utility filed by an activist demanding particulars of salaries to imams by the Delhi authorities and the Delhi Waqf Board, additionally noticed that the order violated constitutional provisions that say “tax payers money will not be used to favour any particular religion”.

The Supreme Court in 1993 on a petition from the All India Imam Organisation had directed the waqf board to present remuneration to imams in mosques managed by it.

He has directed {that a} copy of his order be despatched to the Union regulation minister with appropriate motion to make sure enforcement of provisions of articles 25 to twenty-eight of the Constitution in letter and spirit to maintain all religions on par when it comes to month-to-month remuneration to clergymen of various religions at the price of the general public exchequer — each central and states — and likewise different issues.

“Further with regard to the judgment by the Supreme Court in the case between the ‘All India Imam Organisation and vs Union Of India And Ors’ on 13 May, 1993, that opened the doors to special financial benefits from public treasury to only imams and muezzins in mosques, the commission observes that the highest court of the country in passing this order acted in violation of the provisions of the Constitution, particularly Article 27, which says tax payers money will not be used to favour any particular religion,” Mahurkar mentioned.

“The commission notes that the said judgment sets a wrong precedent in the country and has become a point of unnecessary political slugfest and also social disharmony in the society,” the data commissioner mentioned.

He additionally directed the Delhi Waqf Board to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to RTI activist Subhash Agrawal for the lack of time and assets in chasing the response to his utility.

The activist was not having the ability to get a passable response to his utility.

“It is necessary to go into the history when it comes to giving special religious benefits to the Muslim community by the State. A religious (Islamic) nation Pakistan was born out of the demand of a section of Indian Muslims for partition of India along religious lines. Despite Pakistan choosing to be a religious (Islamic) nation, India chose a Constitution guaranteeing equal rights to all religions,” Mahurkar mentioned.

“It is necessary to note here that it was the policy of giving special benefits to the Muslim community before 1947 that played a key role in encouraging pan-Islamic and fissiparous tendencies in a section of Muslims, ultimately leading to the nation’s partition,” he mentioned.

So giving remuneration to imams and others solely in mosques, quantities to “not just betraying the Hindu community and members of other non-Muslim minority religions, but also encouraging pan-Islamist tendencies amongst a section of Indian Muslims which are already visible”, the data commissioner mentioned.

Steps akin to giving particular non secular advantages to the Muslim group solely just like the one taken up within the current matter, the truth is, severely impacts interfaith concord as they invite contempt for the Muslims as a complete from a bit of extremely nationalist inhabitants, Mahurkar mentioned.

He mentioned the Delhi Waqf Board (DWB) will get an annual grant of round Rs 62 crore from the Delhi authorities whereas its personal month-to-month revenue from unbiased sources is simply round Rs 30 lakh.

“So the monthly honorarium of Rs 18,000 and Rs 16,000 being given to the imams and muezzins of DWB mosques in Delhi is being paid by the Delhi government virtually from the tax payers money which in turn is in sharp contrast with the example quoted by the appellant in which the priest of a Hindu temple is getting a paltry Rs 2,000 per month from the trust controlling the said temple,” he mentioned.

Mahurkar mentioned those that justify such steps within the title of safety to spiritual minorities increase a query that if a selected non secular minority has a proper to safety, the bulk group too has a proper to safety in a multi-religious nation the place it’s incumbent that the rights of the members of all religions are protected equally within the curiosity of inter-faith concord and unity of the nation.

He mentioned Delhi Waqf Board initially denied salaries to imams however later in a revised reply mentioned it’s only an honorarium not a wage.

“The commission observes that there was a clear attempt to hide the information in the initial period by a play of words which showed complete lack of transparency on the part of the respondent authorities in a case which in turn affects the provisions of the Constitution, and also social harmony and uniform applicability of laws for all religions in keeping with the constitutional direction that citizens of all religions be treated equally,” he mentioned.

Mahurkar directed the Delhi Waqf Board and workplace of Delhi Chief Minister to supply responses to the RTI utility of Agrawal.

The orders of the fee, the very best physique to determine appeals and complaints below the RTI Act, are sometimes challenged in excessive courts by writ petitions.

The authorities by an modification within the RTI Act had diluted perks, salaries and tenure of knowledge commissioners from being on par with central election commissioners or to that of bureaucrats serving at their pay scale.

The mounted tenure of 5 years given to an info Commissioner within the RTI Act was additionally lowered to 3 years.