Waqf Board to offer Intermediate education with IAS/IPS coaching
The announcement came during the 5th Waqf Board meeting, presided over by Chairman Abdul Azeez held here on Monday at the Imdad Ghar Complex near Kaleswara Rao Market in Vijayawada. All agenda items presented during the meeting were unanimously passed. Following the board meeting, Abdul Azeez met with several Muthawallis and managing committee members appointed in the previous board meeting and handed over their appointment letters.
Addressing the newly appointed members, Abdul Azeez stated, 'What I am giving you are not positions, but responsibilities.' He lamented that in the past, the Waqf Board had not done enough for the welfare of the Muslim community.
He highlighted that while many philanthropists had donated thousands of acres of land, approximately 30,000 acres of the nearly 70,000 acres of Waqf land have been encroached upon and are no longer under their control. Furthermore, he noted that about 15,000 acres of the remaining land have been acquired by the government.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
2 minutes ago
- India.com
Modi govt upset as these two Muslim countries were included in SCO summit, they were once India's friend, names are...
Modi govt upset as these two Muslim countries were included in SCO summit, they were once India's friend, names are... India has strongly objected to the participation of Pakistan's allies in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit to be held in Tianjin, China. Heads of 20 countries from around the world may participate in this summit to be held in early September. According to reports, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Narendra Modi may also visit Tianjin. According to a report in the Economic Times, before the summit, India has made it clear that the presence of Turkey and Azerbaijan who sided with Pakistan during Operation SIndoor and were seen supporting terrorism may undermine the objectives of the SCO. What is the fault of these two countries? In fact, after the Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22, Turkey and Azerbaijan started showing brotherhood with Pakistan. While on one hand the rest of the Muslim countries also condemned the terrorist attack and adopted a balanced stance on Operation Sindoor, Turkey and Azerbaijan openly supported Pakistan. Even during Operation Sindoor, Pakistan was using drones made in Turkey to attack India. At the same time, Azerbaijan was fully supporting Pakistan politically. Azerbaijan was also maintaining brotherhood with Pakistan because Pakistan supports Azerbaijan in its war with Armenia. Pakistan has not even recognized Armenia as a country. In such a situation, Pakistan's policy in the case of Azerbaijan and Armenia has been one-sided. There is a dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. On the one hand, India is adopting a balanced attitude on this issue, while Pakistan supports Azerbaijan one-sidedly. Talking about trade relations, relations between India and Azerbaijan are also good. However, in terms of political support, Azerbaijan supported Pakistan. One reason for this is also the closeness between Azerbaijan and Turkey. What is SCO summit? The Shanghai Cooperation Organization has 10 full members. It was formed in 2001 in China itself. It earlier included Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. In 2017, India and Pakistan also joined this organization. In 2021, Iran was also given full member status in the organization. Belarus has been included in the organisation as the 10th full member. This time, China has invited Turkey, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Armenia, Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Maldives, Myanmar, Bahrain and UAE as dialogue partners. What is India's stance? Last month, when External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar visited China, he had clearly said during the SCO meeting that countries supporting terrorism will have to be sidelined. He had said that the purpose behind the Pahalgam attack was to harm the tourism economy of Jammu and Kashmir and create hatred between Hindus and Muslims. He had said that the SCO countries will have to jointly fight terrorism, separatism and radicalism.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
After questioning by HC, Centre withdraws order for 6 cuts in Udaipur Files
NEW DELHI: The Additional Solicitor General (ASG) informed the Delhi High Court on Friday that the Central Government has decided to withdraw its directive recommending six cuts in the film Udaipur Files. This move came after the HC questioned whether the Centre had the authority to order such changes while exercising its revisional powers. Following this development, the Delhi High Court disposed of two petitions that sought to halt the release of the film. It directed all involved parties to appear before the appropriate revisional authority on Monday and instructed that a decision be made by Wednesday. Udaipur Files is based on the 2022 murder of Kanhaiya Lal, a tailor from Udaipur, who was killed by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous, allegedly over a social media post supporting an ex-BJP leader. However, the film has drawn sharp criticism. Islamic scholar Arshad Madani and Mohammed Javed—one of the accused in the murder case—petitioned the Supreme Court to stop the film's release, arguing it was inflammatory and communal. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Madani, claimed the film spreads hatred and unfairly targets the Muslim community, warning against allowing hate speech under the guise of free speech. Earlier, the Supreme Court permitted the government to review the movie. A review panel subsequently recommended changes before release. The film's producers then approached the court to challenge the HC's stay on the release. Madani contends the movie generalises a criminal act, portraying an entire community as complicit or supportive of terrorism. Meanwhile, the murder case is ongoing in a Special NIA Court, with hearings set to resume after the summer recess.
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
Malegaon blast case acquittals expose a deep-rooted bias in Congress
The recent verdict in the Malegaon blast case has not just acquitted individuals like Lieutenant Colonel Prasad Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya — it has exposed something far more sinister: The Congress party's consistent and deep-rooted prejudice against the Hindu community. As someone who believes in justice, constitutional morality, and the inclusive spirit of India, I find it essential to call out this ideological poison for what it is. The judgment in the 2008 Malegaon blast case is damning, not for the accused but for the political ecosystem that manipulated agencies, planted narratives, and criminalised identities. The court noted how the prosecution failed to provide evidence beyond reasonable doubt, how witnesses turned hostile, and how the fabric of the case was stitched together with political intent. As someone who has followed the case closely, including the detailed biography of Lt Col Purohit by journalist Smita Mishra, I was appalled. Here was a decorated Army officer who had been entrusted with infiltrating terror networks, but who ended up being framed as a terrorist himself. His nine years behind bars were not just a personal tragedy — they were the outcome of a Congress-led UPA regime that needed to invent 'Hindu terror' to balance Islamist terror in the public discourse. This perverse narrative was systematically constructed by three key Congress leaders. In August 2010, then-Union Home Minister P Chidambaram publicly warned of a new phenomenon of 'saffron terrorism', alleging that radical Hindu outfits were implicated in bomb blasts. His colleague Digvijay Singh then popularised the term within the Congress ranks, describing 'terrorism among Hindus' while paradoxically objecting to religious descriptors for terrorism. The campaign reached its peak when then-Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde defended 'saffron terror' at a party conclave in January 2013, claiming his ministry's confidential papers substantiated the allegations. Years later, Shinde would admit that coining the term was a mistake — but by then, irreparable damage had been done to innocent lives and India's social fabric. This perverse narrative found its way into diplomatic cables too. In the WikiLeaks cable from 2009, Rahul Gandhi reportedly told then-US Ambassador Timothy Roemer that Hindu radicalism was a bigger threat to India than Lashkar-e-Taiba. This was not a stray remark. It was a window into the Congress's ideological framework, where the Hindu is always the problem and the minority vote bank must always be coddled, even at the cost of truth. Go back to 1951. When the Somnath temple was reconstructed after centuries of devastation, India's first President Rajendra Prasad, agreed to attend the inauguration. But Jawaharlal Nehru disapproved, fearing it would look like 'Hindu revivalism'. Fast forward to 1985. The Supreme Court delivers a progressive judgment in favor of Shah Bano, a Muslim woman seeking alimony. But Rajiv Gandhi caved under pressure from conservative clerics and overturned the ruling through legislation. In 1988, the Congress government banned Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses — even before protests erupted in India. It wasn't about public order; it was about pre-emptively appeasing a vote bank. And perhaps the most shocking of all: In 2006, then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declared, 'We will have to devise innovative plans to ensure that minorities, particularly the Muslim minority, are empowered to share equitably in the fruits of development. They must have the first claim on resources.' I am a Dalit, and I cannot stay silent at the suggestion that national development should be filtered by religion. What about the poor Hindu, the Dalit student, the tribal child? Does their struggle not count? Today, when Rahul Gandhi speaks of 'social justice' and champions Dalit rights, one must ask: How does denying reservation to marginalised communities in prestigious institutions like AMU and Jamia serve social justice? This is the height of hypocrisy — using Dalit symbolism for votes while systematically undermining Dalit interests in policy. This isn't just about Congress. It's about the future of India's democracy. A nation cannot move forward if it continues to be shackled by ideological hatred and historical bias. Hindu identity is not extremist. It is civilisational. And those who equate it with terror not only insult India's history —they endanger its future. The Congress party owes an apology. To the falsely accused. To the institutions it compromised. And to the silent Hindu majority who have endured humiliation in the name of 'secularism'. The writer is national spokesperson of the BJP
