Waqf Board And Larger Agenda

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
The Pioneer, Jul 15, 2005

HC asks Bukhari to submit statement of accounts to Wakf Board
Agencies / New Delhi

<b>Syed Ahmed Bukhari, whose status as Imam of Jama Masjid was questioned by Delhi Wakf Board, was today directed by Delhi High Court to submit a statement of accounts of last 30 years </b>to the board and ordered him to co- operate with authorities in removal of encroachments in and around the historic monument.

The order came from a division bench of Chief Justice B C Patel and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul after Wakf Board counsel Najmi Waziri submitted that the Imam had not rendered any statement of accounts to the board since 1975.

The bench directed Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Delhi Wakf Board to remove all encroachments in and around the mosque and asked Bukhari to co operate with the authorities in implementation of the order.

It also directed the Commissioner of Police to provide adequate force for carrying out the court's directives and said any communication in this regard from MCD or Wakf Board to the police chief had to be confidential.

Observing that the beautiful, prestigious and historical monument needed to be preserved and protected, the bench said "it is the responsibility of the MCD and Delhi Wakf Board to see that unauthorised structures are removed and do not crop up again in and around Jama Masjid."

The court asked the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to carry out minor repairs in the mosque and submit completion report in this regard by August 3, the next date of hearing.

The court is hearing a PIL by heritage and culture forum, an NGO, seeking direction to the Centre to declare Jama Masjid a protected monument under the ancient monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Good, install some device inside Mosque. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<b>'Taj never placed under Waqf by Shah Jahan'</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Giving a literal translation of Abdul Hamid Lahori’s Badshahnama, the official history of the first two decades of Shah Jahan’s rule, which the Waqf has cited to buttress its claim, Prof Shireen Moosvi said it is not Taj Mahal, the monument but 30 villages and Tajganj that were placed in Waqf.

It was normal practice in the Mughal government to attach villages to particular imperial tombs as Waqf and government officials were appointed to collect the revenues of the villages and bazars so endowed. The money thus collected was to be used for repair of the tombs and the balance amount on salaries of persons employed, Prof Moosvi explained in a statement adding that the percentage of amount to be spent under various heads was to be decided by the ruler from time to time.

Obviously, there was no special ‘management’ of the Waqfs of villages and shops established for the tombs, separate from the apparatus of the Mughal administration, she says.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Another example of exploitation of local population.

[Guest]

<b>BJP wants Waqf Board scrapped</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->He charged the Waqf Board with lending a religious colour to historic heritage like Taj Mahal and claiming it as Waqf property saying it was a challenge to Indian Constitution, law and order and democratic structure which “if not taken seriously, could lead to serious consequences in the coming days”.

“If mosques, burial grounds and places where namaz is offered become the criteria for Waqf property, then perhaps 90 per cent of important buildings would have to be handed over to Waqf Boards”, he said in the letter, copy of which was released to the media.

“There is an imminent need to discuss the relevance and necessity in a secular country of institutions like the Waqf Boards which cannot pay their employees, maintain their assets and are mired in controversy”, said Naqvi, a former chairman of the joint parliamentary committee on the functioning of Waqf Boards in the country<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Taj issue: Waqf Board moves SC

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board on Tuesday filed a caveat in the Supreme Court to prevent the Archaeological Survey of India from taking an ex parte order on the issue.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Taj Mahal not Waqf property: Records
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Revenue records pertaining to the Taj Mahal does not show that the historic monument as a Waqf property, official sources said on Monday.

This disputes the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board's claim that the Taj is waqf property and that it should get the right to control and manageme it.

A report prepared by the Tehsildar, in whose area the monument is located, said land records show that the Taj is Shahi Imarat (royal building), the sources added.

The Agra district magistrate is expected to send the required information to the waqf authorities after more investigation.

The magistrate had issued notices to the Archaelogical Survey of India and the Centre stating that it had received applications for the registration of Maqbara Shahjehan and Mumtaz Mahal property known as 'Taj Mahal' at Agra under the provision 36 of the Waqf Act, 1995.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Whole India was a Hindu nation why not check records from 3000 BC to resolve all matters. Since when invaders who are dead have any Rights on any damn property.

[Guest]

Taj should be declared national property: Nariman
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Noted constitutional lawyer and member of Rajya Sabha Fali Nariman said that Taj Mahal should be declared as a national heritage by the government of India. He did not agree with stand of H R Bhardwaj, minister for law and justice that the government of India would move the Supreme Court against the claim of the Waqf Board that Taj Mahal belongs to the Board.


<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Bharatvarsh]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ASI files petition challenging Wakf board's declaration on Taj

August 12, 2005 13:48 IST
Last Updated: August 12, 2005 19:43 IST

The Archaeological Survey of India has appealed to the Supreme Court on Friday to overturn a lower court decision that could give control of the Taj Mahal to the Sunni Waqf Board, a news report said.

The ASI has been responsible for the upkeep of the 17th-century monument to love since 1920, when India was under British rule, and the case could help decide unanswered questions about who legally owns some of the country's centuries-old religious monuments.

The ASI on Friday filed a petition with the Supreme Court challenging a lower court decision that -- at least on paper -- handed ownership of the Taj to the Sunni Waqf Board, a semiofficial organisation that manages Muslim graves and mosques in India, PTI reported.

But the ASI still controls the Taj, despite the decisions of the state court and Sunni board, and decided to go the Supreme Court to clear up the controversy, PTI reported.

The Taj Mahal, built by Moghul Emperor Shah Jahan for his favorite wife, Mumtaz Mahal, houses the graves of the Muslim emperor, his wife and other Moghul royalty.

The controversy erupted after a Muslim citizen filed a case in the Uttar Pradesh high court, where the white-marble structure is located, saying Muslims should manage the Taj, not the government.

The court then referred the case to the Sunni board, which turned around and decided that it owned the Taj. The organisation demanded 7% of annual gate receipts from the hundreds of thousands of tourists who pay to see it every year. The board also said it must have a say in how the rest of the money earned from tourists is used.

The Taj Mahal, designated by the United Nations as a world heritage monument, is located in the northern city of Agra, about 210 km east of New Delhi.

http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/aug/12asi.htm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe we should do a Babri over the Taj Mahal if courts are so brain dead that they will give control of Taj Mahal to Waqf board, if it goes to waqf board then we might as well do another repeat of Babri so that the Waqf board losers can't get any funds from Taj revenue to finance their jihadi activities.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Maybe we should do a Babri over the Taj Mahal if courts are so brain dead that they will give control of Taj Mahal to Waqf board, if it goes to waqf board then we might as well do another repeat of Babri so that the Waqf board losers can't get any funds from Taj revenue to finance their jihadi activities. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Naa no need for that.

[edited]

[Guest]

I have heard this but not known any specifics.

People say Mosques are demolished quite often in muslim countries eg, Iraq to make way for highways or other public building. any one knows of any facts to back such claims?
Thanks

[acharya]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Resist Islamist pressure</b>
Balbir K Punj
The Pioneer
24th Feb 2006
In December 1998, comedian Johnny Lever was sentenced to seven days of imprisonment by Additional Metropolitan Magistrate of Mumbai under Section 2 of Prevention of Insult’s to National Honour Act for caricaturing the national anthem and the Indian Constitution at a private function in Hyatt Regency Hotel of Dubai in 1990.Sleuths of Intelligence Bureau were entrusted the task of recovering his performance’s videotape, which was then presented to the court as evidence. The Johnny Lever episode was recently refreshed in public memory after a private channel recently showed a video recording of Bollywood stars performing at the wedding of Dawood Ibrahim’s nephew.

Contrast this with the universal condemnation in the country of Prophet Mohammed’s cartoons but dodging the issue of MF Husain’s obscene painting of ‘ Bharat Mata’. Old-fox Husain has gone beyond his limits of denigrating Hindu gods and goddess; and in the process demeaning India . You do not need to engage any IB sleuth to procure a graphic evidence from beyond borders to prove this. Then why should there be one standard for Johnny Lever and another for MF Husain? Nor is protecting the honour of India the sole responsibility of the BJP or the Sangh Parivar. Do not the so-called secularists from Congress sing ‘Vande Mataram’ -the hymn in the honour of Mother India and our national song - at AICC sessions? How can they sing paeans to Mother India and tolerate its ‘graphic vilification’ at the same time ? If defending ‘Mother India’ becomes an act of ‘Hindu communalism’ today, then we are not far from ‘Pakistanisation’ of the country! Last Monday BJP’s Ravi Shankar Prasad raised the twin issues of Prophet’s Mohammed’s cartoons and Husain’s painting portraying ‘Bharat-Mata’ in Rajya Sabha during zero hour. But Parliamentary Affairs Minister

Suresh Pachouri of the Congress, while explicitly condemning the Prophet’s cartoons, did not mention Husain. It forced me and other Rajya Sabha members of the BJP to rush to the well of the House and demand unanimous condemnation of Husain as well.

Only persistent shouting of ‘Bharat mata ki jai’ for about 15 minutes could elicit a specific condemnation of the painter. Is it credible for the Indian Parliament to unequivocally condemn insult to Prophet Mohammed but maintain silence on the insult to Bharat mata, let alone Hindu deities?

After the Gujarat riots, some ‘secularists’ were suddenly reminded of Kashmiri Hindus languishing in camps for over a decade, only to show that they were not partial while sympathising with Muslim riot-victims huddled in camps in Ahmedabad. Had Gujarat tragedy not occurred, they have would not even paid lip-service to Kashmir. Had the cartoon controversy not erupted, the ‘secularists’ would have been happy to support Husain’s right to freedom of _expression as they have been doing so in the past.

India I am afraid, is turning into a camp following Islam’s jihad for world conquest. Our ‘secularists’ are behaving like stewards who used to follow Aurangzeb in his jihadi campaigns. Demographically, India forms the lone significant hurdle between two concentrations of Islam in West-Central Asia and South-East Asia (Indonesia, world’s largest Muslim country). We are flanked by two regions with the largest concentration of Muslim population on our immediate left and right. If India goes down, the caliphate is a certainty, for whose establishment Islamists all over the world are working overtime.

If Indians - or Hindus - succumb to this Islamic pressure, then our civilisation runs the risk of collapsing. It might appear surprising that Muslim protest rallies in Hyderabad, Muzafarnagar, and Lucknow against Prophet’s cartoons published in European dailies should lead to looting of Hindu shops, stoning Hindus, shouting slogans against Hindu deities and ransacking the BJP office.No Indian newspaper has published or rather dared to publish the cartoons. Even then why have the Hindus been at the end of Islamic ire? It is because to Islam one kafir (non-Muslim) is as good as another. This was proved during the Solapur riots in Maharashtra in 2002. A critical comment on Prophet Mohammed by American evangelist Jerry Falwell led Muslims of Solapur to vent their ire upon Hindus.But is this not what happened in Mopla riots (1920)? BR Ambedkar in his book Pakistan or The Partition of India says, “The outbreak was essentially a rebellion against the British Government. The aim was to reestablish the kingdom of Islam by overthrowing the British government...As a rebellion against the British Government it was quite understandable. But what baffled most was the treatment accorded by the Mopla to Hindus of Malabar. The Hindus were visited by a dire fate at the hands of Moplas. Massacres, forcible conversions, desecration of temples, foul outrages upon women, such as ripping of pregnant women, pillage, arson and destruction-in short, all the accompaniments of brutal and unrestrained barbarism, were perpetrated freely by the Moplas upon the Hindus .

Islamic behaviour is atavistic. Thus, I was not surprised when Uttar Pradesh Minority Welfare Minister Hajji Yakoob Qureshi put a price of Rs 51 crore (plus incentive in gold)on the heads of Danish cartoonists.

Refusing to acknowledge it as ‘supari’ (contract killing money, as BJP’s Lalji Tandon described it) he defended his decision, on a private television news channel, as deriving legitimacy from Islamic law. Or in other words, the UP Minister was implying, “damn your constitution, damn your law of the land, I recognise only Islam.” One finds an analogy in another description by BR Ambedkar -“Nathuramal Sharma was murdered by Abdul Qayum in September,
1934.It was an act of great daring. For Sharma was stabbed to death in the Court of the Judicial Commissioner of Sind where he was seated awaiting the hearing of his appeal against his conviction under Section 195, IPC, for the

publication of a pamphlet on the history of Islam..The leading Moslems, however, never condemned these criminals. On the contrary, they were hailed as religious martyrs and agitation was carried on for clemency being shown to them. As an illustration to this attitude, one may refer to Mr Barkat Alli, a barrister of Lahore, who argued the appeal of Abdul Qayum. He went to the length of saying that Qayum was not guilty of murder of Nathuramal because his act was justifiable by the law of the Koran. This attitude of the Moslems is quite understandable.

What is not understandable is the attitude of Mr Gandhi”Thus when a senior member of All-India Muslim Personal Law Board Zafaryab Jilani defends Haji Yakub Qureshi’s Rs 51-crore prize money or Maulana Mufti Abul Irfan issues a fatwa on behalf of two ‘Sharia courts’ Idara-e-Sharia Darul Qaza and Ifta Firangi Mahali Taksal of Lucknow it does not come as a surprise. They are revealing something important about ‘Islam, the religion of peace, mercy and benevolence’. But what is not understandable is how ‘secularists’ are trivialising Haji Yakub

Qureshi’s threat that constitutes a cognisable offence under Indian Penal Code.

Samajwadi Party’s Amar Singh looked ridiculous when he said Qureshi did not have enough money to foot Rs 51crore bill. UP Chief Secretary Alok Sinha (his script apparently prepared by UP Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav) says that those cartoonists are not citizens/residents of India. The IPC makes no distinction between a citizen/resident of India or otherwise.

It means the fatwa is acceptable; the quibble is only over money.I fear US President George Bush, who is not a citizen/resident of India, may receive a prize on his head from Indian Muslim organisations. Will the Indian Government twiddle its finger over citizenship status of George Bush in such a scenario? It is heartening to learn that a criminal case against Haji Yaqoob has finally been filed in Ghaziabad. It proves we are yet not living in a land dictated by Sharia.
(The writer is a Rajya Sabha MP and can be contacted @bpunj@email.com) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<b>Muslim board lands Infy in trouble </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If the Andhra Pradesh State Wakf Board is to be believed, all these IT biggies and India’s premier business school have been illegally constructed on its land.

The Wakf Board has now served notices to over half-a-dozen companies including the above-mentioned and has asked the companies to either pay up or vacate the land within three months.

.................
"The claims of the Wakf Board have come very late. Almost a decade has passed, buildings have been constructed and the companies have been doing business at the international level. We will study the basis of Wakf Board's claim,” says Wakf Minister Mohammad Ali Shabbir.

The Wakf Board on its part says it learnt about the encroachments only recently, during an on-going survey of Wakf properties in the state.

The companies are not willing to react on this controversy while APIIC wants to remain silent till it prepares an explanation.

On the other side, Wakf Board has given three options to companies: purchase the land at the present market rate, sign a new lease agreement with the Wakf Board or vacate the land within three months.

<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Wakf can claim whole India, they occupied India for 900 years.

[Guest]

<b>Maharashtra minister dupes Waqf </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nagpur: After land deals of Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh came under the scanner, it's now the state Animal Husbandry and Waqf Minister Anees Ahmad who’s facing the heat.

Documents available with CNN-IBN show <b>Ahmad purchased the state Waqf Board's land worth at least Rs 4 crore for just Rs 1,763.</b>

<b>The 1.75-acre of land – that once belonged to Waqf board of Maharashtra – is now the property of the Mehemuda Shiksha and Mahila Gramin Vikas – a trust registered in Ahmad’s name and run by his wife. </b>

<b>“Anees Ahmed had used his authority as the Waqf minister to transfer 1.75 acres of land to his trust in 2003,” confirms a local Mohd Salim Asrafi.</b>

The documents also reveal how the then collector of Nagpur brought this land under the Urban Land Ceilings Act so it could be transferred to the minister's trust without trouble.

But Ahmad denies these charges and is now pointing fingers at the Waqf Board.

<b>“The Waqf board has misused its authority in many cases. I can assure you that there has been no such deal,” he says in his defence.

However, Waqf Board officials claim Ahmad had himself admitted to the dubious deal in private. </b>

“He'd told me that he would vacate this land but he hasn't done that so far,” says Chairman of Maharashtra Waqf Board, M A Aziz.

The revelations have angered the Muslim community and strong reactions have started pouring in already.

<b>“A fatwa needs to be issued against him. He has usurped land meant for the mosque,” says Secretary, Noori Masjid, Maharashtra Waqf Board Salim Chisti</b>. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>The IBN network had earlier exposed how the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation twisted rules to give a 55-acre plot to CM Vilasrao Deshmukh's charitable trust. </b>

The latest expose on another minister's dubious land deal has put the state's Congress-led government in a spot.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->