Latest news with #PlacesofWorship(SpecialProvisions)Act
NDTV
28-05-2025
- Politics
- NDTV
Sikkim Seeks Ban On Scaling Kanchenjunga, Days After Army Team Summitted It
The Sikkim Chief Minister Prem Singh Tamang has written to the Union Home Minister Amit Shah to hold talks with Nepal to bring into effect a ban on scaling Mt Kanchenjunga, the third highest mountain peak in the world, as it is regarded sacred by the people of his state. Climbing the Kanchenjunga is not allowed from the Sikkimese side and mountaineers scale the peak from the Nepal side. In the letter, Mr Tamang referred to the May 18 ascent of the peak by a five-member team from the National Institute of Mountaineering and Adventure Sports (NIMAS) from the Nepal side, adding that this has hurt Sikkim's indigenous communities. The Chief Minister wrote, "Mount Khangchendzonga holds profound spiritual and religious significance for the people of Sikkim. Regarded as the most sacred mountain in the state its name translates to "Five Treasures Of The High Snows", symbolising five divine treasures. According to the Sikkimese belief system, these treasures remain hidden and shall be revealed only to the devout when the world is in grave peril." "The mountain is revered as the abode of the principal guardian and protector-deity of Sikkim known as the 'Dzoe-Nga'. This sacred being is worshipped as the 'Pho-Lha,' or chief of the entire assemblage of supernatural entities of Sikkim. These deities were recognised and anointed as the 'Guardian Deities of the Land' by Ugyen Guru Rinpoche, also known as Guru Padmasambhava, the patron saint of Sikkim," he further wrote. Asking for a complete ban on mountaineering activities on the mountain, the Mr Tamang wrote the move will be "in deference to the deeply-held beliefs and cultural values of the people of Sikkim". His letter comes after Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) raised the issue with the authorities. On April 4 this year, the SIBLAC wrote to the Sikkim Governor Om Prakash Mathur, seeking his immediate attention for safeguarding the cultural and spiritual heritage of Sikkim. "The Government of Sikkim in 2001, banned expeditions to Mount Khangchendzongna under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which protects sacred sites. This ban was reinforced by Article 371 (F) of the Indian Constitution, which safeguards Sikkim's cultural and religious laws post its 1975 merger with India, under which there exists a law prohibiting the climbing of this mountain. Additionally, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, revoked its earlier decision to open this mountain in September 2019, removing Kanchenjunga and thirteen other sacred peaks from the list of open peaks", the SIBLAC said in a letter to the Governor. The Indian Army's NIMAS, located at Dirang in Arunachal Pradesh, summitted Mount Kangchenjunga (8,586 metres), as part of the 'Har Shikhar Tiranga' Mission, a patriotic mission to hoist the Indian national flag atop the highest peak of each of India's 28 states. The summitting of the Kanchenjunga has secured a 100 per cent success for the NIMAS. "This wasn't just another expedition for us. This was the final summit of the iconic Har Shikhar Tiranga Mission - a journey to hoist the Tricolour on the highest peak of every Indian state. With this climb, Team NIMAS has etched history - completing a mission that fused adventure, patriotism, and purpose. 5 team members, 100 per cent success, and a summit that tested every ounce of our will. To all those who believed, supported, and prayed , this one is for you. And to the mighty Kangchenjunga - you humbled us, and you made us better," the mountaineering team from NIMAS said. The NIMAS team summitted the Kanchenjunga using the normal route that mountaineers use, which is climbing the mountain from the Nepal side and sources say the expedition was conducted with utmost respect and reverence to all beliefs. The mountain is accessible to mountaineers and Nepal has not imposed any ban on the climbing of the mountain. Sources familiar with the expedition told NDTV that they were surprised the summiting of the peak has become an issue. "Mountaineering activity continues at the Kanchenjunga normally and the team summitted the peak like all other expeditions from across the world. Keeping our beliefs in mind, all efforts were taken to keep the sanctity and spiritual sensibilities intact and the expedition was conducted with utmost respect," the team said. According to Nepal's Ministry of Culture, Tourism, and Civil Aviation, from March 1 to April 25 this year, 41 climbers received permits to scale Mt Kanchenjunga, the world's third highest peak, within the climbing season which is usually limited to a period of one-and-a-half months every year. The Government of Nepal collects royalty fees from climbers and issues permits and it is a major economic activity and source of revenue for Nepal. This year, the revenue earned from royalty fees amounted to $73,800 between March 1 to April 25. However, no expeditions to the mountain have taken place from the Indian side over the last two decades in deference to the customs and beliefs of the people of Sikkim who regard climbing of the peak as the desecration of the mountain. The Kanchenjunga, till today, remains the highest in terms of the fatality rate for mountaineers and it is considered more difficult to climb than Mount Everest, the highest mountain peak in the world.
The Hindu
22-05-2025
- Sport
- The Hindu
Indian team scales world's third-highest peak
GUWAHATI A team from the National Institute of Mountaineering and Adventure Sports (NIMAS) in Arunachal Pradesh's Dirang became the first from India this climbing season to scale Mount Khangchendzonga, the world's third-highest peak. While the feat has been hailed as the first '100% success' in scaling the peak, the Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) found it 'painful', as Mt. Khangchendzonga is revered as the guardian deity of the indigenous communities in the Himalayan State. The '100%' refers to all five members of the team led by NIMAS Director Col. Ranveer Singh Jamwal reaching the summit on May 18. A five-member team from the Army achieved the same feat a day later. 'In a season marked by extreme conditions and high attrition, every climber from the NIMAS team who attempted the summit made it — an extraordinary accomplishment on one of the most formidable mountains in the world,' a statement from a Ministry of Defence spokesperson read. Mt. Khangchendzonga, India's tallest peak at 8,586 metres above sea level, borders Sikkim and Nepal. The NIMAS and the Army teams approached the peak from the Nepal side, as the mountain is considered too sacred in Sikkim to set foot on. 'The expedition marked the culmination of 'Har Shikhar Tiranga', a patriotic mission to hoist the Indian national flag atop the highest peak of each of India's 28 States. The expedition was a tribute to every corner of India, and I am honoured to have led the mission,' he said after reaching the base camp on Thursday (May 22, 2025). Members of the SIBLAC said the climbers did display character in scaling Mt. Khangchendzonga but lamented the 'indifference' of the Ministry of Defence to their plea to call off the expedition. 'The Nepal government has been consistently ignoring our appeals to make the peak out of bounds for climbers because of the sacredness attached to it. We hoped our government would listen to us,' SIBLAC advisor, S.B. Tshering, told The Hindu. Recognised as a sacred site, Mt. Khangchendzonga is protected under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The people of Sikkim celebrate Pang Lhabsol, an annual festival, to honour and remember the spiritual significance of the mountain.
Indian Express
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
HC rejects plea against Sambhal mosque survey: ‘No error, illegality in trial court's order'
The Allahabad High Court on Monday rejected a petition filed by the Mosque Committee of Sambhal's Shahi Jama Masjid challenging the trial court order of survey of the Mughal era mosque following claims by Hindus that it was built by destroying a temple. Upholding the November 19 order of the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) of Sambhal, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal of the High Court said: 'The court below had not committed any error, irregularity or illegality in granting leave to institute the suit before the expiry of period of notice under Section 80(2) CPC, as it was never objected by the Government or its officials defendants…' The High Court held that the suit was 'not prima facie barred' by the provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. '…in fact, it has been filed seeking right to access to property in dispute under Section 18 of the Act of 1958 being a protected monument,' the High Court said. 'This is not a case where any conversion of place of worship is taking place or any religious character of place of worship is being changed. Plaintiffs have only sought right to access to a protected monument declared in the year 1920 under Section 18 of the Act of 1958,' the court said, referring to The Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. In an ex-parte order, the Sambhal trial court had ordered a survey of the mosque by an advocate commissioner. Five days later, on November 24, four people died of gunshot wounds metres away from the mosque as violence broke out after a survey team showed up at the mosque. The police, however, claimed the bullets were not fired by them. In its appeal, the mosque committee said the mosque has been in existence since the 16th century and has been in continuous use by Muslims as a place of worship, but the matter was rushed through in 'hot haste' after a suit was filed by eight plaintiffs who alleged that it was built after destroying a temple. 'The act of allowing application under Order XXVI Rule 9 for local investigation and appointing Advocate Commission has not caused any prejudice to the revisionist as he has right to question the same at the stage of Order XXVI Rule 10(2) CPC before the report is confirmed and admitted as an evidence and made part of the record,' the High Court said on Monday. 'Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that no interference is required in the order dated 19.11.2024 passed by court below allowing application Paper No. 3C granting leave to institute suit and application 8C for appointment of Commission for local investigation,' the order added. Last November, the Supreme Court had asked the mosque management committee to approach the Allahabad High Court against the trial court order, saying further proceedings before the trial court would follow the directions of the High Court. Underlining that 'peace and harmony must prevail', the Supreme Court bench of then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar had directed the trial court to temporarily halt proceedings in the matter. PTI adds: Shri Gopal Sharma, the lawyer of the Hindu side in the Shahi Jama Masjid, said, 'The High Court has rejected it (the plea) as per the rules. We welcome the decision of the High Court. The survey ordered by the civil judge senior division of Sambhal was within the law and was appropriate.' On the other hand, the lawyer of the Muslim side, Shakeel Ahmed Warsi, said the High Court's order was according to the judicial process. The original plaintiffs in the suit claimed the right of access to the religious site at Mohalla Kot Purvi in Sambhal district. The committee alleged the suit was filed at noon on November 19 and within hours, the judge appointed a commission and directed an initial survey at the mosque, which was done on the same day and again on November 24, 2024. The court had also directed that a report of the survey be filed before it by November 29.
New Indian Express
28-04-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
No error in Allahabad HC order impleading Centre and ASI in Shahi Idgah mosque case, says SC
The Supreme Court on Monday said that the order passed by the Allahabad High Court in the Shahi Idgah case, allowing the Hindu side's plea to amend their plaint and add the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) as a party, is prima facie correct. The high court on March 5 allowed an amendment application filed by the Hindu side (plaintiffs) permitting them to incorporate new facts into the suit and add the Union of India and ASI as defendants. Challenging this HC order, the Muslim side had moved the top court and sought quashing of it. The Muslim side, in the top court, opposed the Hindu parties' application to amend the suit. They said it was a way to get around their defence, which was based on the Places of Worship Act. During the course of the hearing, the two-judge bench of the top court, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and including Justice PV Sanjay Kumar, refused to entertain the appeal of the Muslim side. "The Committee of Management of the Shahi Idgah mosque is absolutely wrong in their plea that the Allahabad High Court's decision to allow the Hindu plaintiffs to do so was wrong," the court said. This order of the top court necessarily means that the Hindu plaintiffs have to be allowed to implead the ASI and the Union in the main suits filed on behalf of the deity. The apex court on Monday granted time to the Muslim side to file their reply and deferred the hearing to April 8. The complex is located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple, a site of significant religious importance for Hindus. The Hindu litigants claimed the premises hold signs suggesting that a temple once existed at the site. The mosque committee, in its appeal filed in the apex court, said the lawsuits filed by Hindu litigants over the dispute violated the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, and were therefore not maintainable. It is to be noted that Allahabad High Court judge Justice Mayank Jain had on August 1, dismissed the plea filed by the Shahi Idgah Masjid Committee challenging the maintainability of the suits filed by the Hindu parties seeking restoration of the Lord Krishna temple at the location where the mosque exists. The Hindu parties claimed in the HC that Sri Krishna's birthplace lies beneath the mosque and that there were many signs which established that the mosque was indeed a Hindu temple. On the other hand, the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board sought dismissal of the plea filed by the Hindu side. It argued in the HC that the suits of the Hindu side were barred under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 ('Places of Worship Act') that prohibited changing the status of any place of worship from what it was on the day of the country's Independence.
United News of India
28-04-2025
- Politics
- United News of India
SC backs Allahabad HC's order in Shahi Idgah-Krishna Janmabhoomi case
New Delhi, Apr 28 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday observed that the Allahabad High Court's order allowing the Hindu side to amend their plaint and add the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) as a party in the Shahi Idgah-Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute is prima facie correct. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar made the remarks while hearing the appeal filed by the Muslim side challenging the High Court's decision. "One thing is clear. The amendment to the original plaint by the Hindu plaintiffs has to be allowed," the Bench remarked during the proceedings. The Hindu parties had approached the High Court seeking to amend their original suit by claiming that the disputed structure was a protected monument under the ASI and, therefore, the protection under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 would not apply. Consequently, they argued, the structure cannot continue as a mosque. They also sought to make ASI a party to the suit, which the High Court permitted in March 2024. The Muslim side then approached the Supreme Court against this order. Earlier, on April 4, the apex court had issued notice to the Hindu side on this appeal. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the Court observed that the Muslim side's plea appeared "misconceived," with the Bench remarking, "This plea is absolutely wrong. The High Court should have allowed the amendment to add the parties to the suit." The Court, however, granted time to the Muslim side to file their written statement and deferred further hearing. In their plea before the High Court, the Hindu side asserted that a 1920 notification issued by the Lieutenant Governor of the United Province had declared the structure a protected monument under Section 3 of the Ancient Monument Preservation Act. They argued that because of this historical status, the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which protects the status of religious places as they existed on August 15, 1947, would not apply. The Muslim side opposed the amendments, arguing that the Hindu plaintiffs were attempting to "wriggle out" of the bar imposed by the Places of Worship Act by introducing new claims. "The proposed amendments show that the Plaintiffs are attempting to negate the defence taken by the defendant that the suit is barred by the Places of Worship Act, 1991," they argued. The Allahabad High Court on March 5 allowed the amendment and the addition of ASI as a party, prompting the appeal before the Supreme Court. The original dispute traces back to a civil suit filed by the Hindu side claiming that the Shahi Idgah mosque was constructed on the Krishna Janmabhoomi land. The suit was filed on behalf of the deity Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman and some Hindu devotees seeking removal of the mosque. Initially, the civil court had dismissed the suit in September 2020, citing the bar under the Places of Worship Act. However, the Mathura District Court reversed this decision in May 2022, holding that the suit was maintainable. Subsequently, the matter was transferred to the High Court in 2023. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is also considering appeals against related orders, including the Allahabad High Court's decision allowing consolidation of 18 related suits and their transfer to the High Court. It is pertinent to note that the apex court had, in December last year, directed courts across India not to pass any effective orders or surveys in suits disputing the religious character of existing structures, until the validity of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 is decided. This order was issued in connection with a separate case challenging the constitutional validity of the 1991 Act. Thus, no effective orders have been passed by lower courts, including in the Shahi Idgah matter, pending the Supreme Court's final decision on the 1991 Act. UNI SNG CS
