Vile Parle Jain temple demolition: HC extends status quo of Jain temple for four weeks
On April 16 this year, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) demolished most of the Digambar Jain temple in Vile Parle that sparked outrage and protests from members of the Jain community.
The HC observed that the BMC's action cannot be faulted with and there was no 'illegality' or 'perversity' in the impugned order of the city civil court .
A single-judge bench of Justice Gauri V Godse issued an order, allowing the status quo it granted on April 16 against further demolition to continue for another four weeks.
This came after the judge was informed that appellant—Shree 1008 Digambar Jain Mandir Trust— had given an undertaking to the BMC that it will remove the temporary shed constructed for protection from monsoon before October 31 this year.
On April 7, a city civil court had rejected the temple Trust's plea against demolition action but it gave the Trust interim protection from demolition for seven days to allow it to file an appeal in the high court.
On April 15, the city civil court rejected an application by the temple Trust, seeking extension of interim protection from demolition. On April 16, the Trust informed the HC that the BMC officials and police were present at the site to begin demolition, after which the HC passed an order that status quo in respect of the suit structure as of now shall be maintained, However, the court was informed that most of the structure had already been demolished.
Senior advocate Surel Shah, representing the Trust, on Tuesday sought the HC's interference in the impugned order, stating that the BMC could not have initiated the action at the subject premises. However, advocate Drupad Patil for the BMC submitted that there was no restrictive order against it to take an action.
The HC noted that two separate actions were initiated by the BMC in December, 2024, including one implementing its notice under Section 53 (notice against unauthorised development) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning (MRTP) Act.
The notice issued by BMC under said provision was confirmed and upheld by the Supreme Court. The Trust had withdrawn its challenge against the implementation of the said notice.
The second notice was issued by the BMC under Section 488 (inspection of premises by civic authorities) under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act.
The HC further noted that the BMC was not prevented from taking action of implementing notice under Section 53 of the MRTP Act, as the same had attained the finality before the Supreme Court and the Trust 'would not be entitled to seek any relief'.
'Thus, the prima facie opinion expressed by city civil court in impugned order to refuse grant of any interim relief cannot be faulted. In the absence of any prima facie case made out by the plaintiff, the reasons recorded in impugned order cannot be faulted,' the HC observed.
'I do not see any legality or perversity in the impugned order. The appeal is devoid of any merit, hence the same is dismissed,' Justice Godse held. The HC said that it will pass an order on other appeals and contempt plea along with issue of removal of debris on Wednesday, July 9.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
31 minutes ago
- Mint
Life term, ₹10 lakh fine, no parole: AAP govt's across-faith anti-sacrilege Bill in Punjab explained
The Aam Aadmi Party government on July 14 introduced in the Punjab Assembly an anti-sacrilege bill, proposing punishment up to life imprisonment for sacrilegious acts against religious scriptures. Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann tabled the 'Punjab Prevention of Offences Against Holy Scripture(s) Bill 2025' in the House for discussion. The Speaker deferred the discussion on the bill for Tuesday after Leader of Opposition Partap Singh Bajwa pointed out that, considering the seriousness of the issue, they need time to prepare to effectively express their viewpoints on the bill. Before the start of the third day of the special session of the state Assembly, the Punjab Prevention of Offences Against Holy Scripture(s) Bill, 2025, was cleared by the cabinet in a meeting chaired by Chief Minister Mann here. The proposed law mandates strict punishment, extending up to life imprisonment, for the desecration of holy scriptures, including the Guru Granth Sahib, Bhagavad Gita, Bible and Quran, an official spokesperson told news agency PTI after the cabinet meeting. Any person found guilty of sacrilege may face imprisonment ranging from 10 years to life. The guilty shall also be liable to pay a fine of ₹ 5 lakh which may extend up to ₹ 10 lakh, the bill proposes. Those attempting to commit the offence may be sentenced to three to five years and shall also be liable to pay a fine which may extend up to ₹ 3 lakh, as per the Bill. If such an offence leads to communal riots, or causes loss of human life or damage to public or private property, the punishment may range from 20 years to life imprisonment, with a fine of ₹ 10-20 lakh, the bill proposes. There is no provision for parole or furlough for those who receive the maximum sentence or fail to pay the fine. Individuals found abetting the crime will be punished in accordance with the offence committed. The proposed law also covers religious figures such as granthis, pathi singhs, sevadars, ragis, dadhis, prabandhaks, pandits, purohits, maulvis and pastors appointed to perform religious duties related to their holy scriptures. If found guilty of sacrilege, they will be punished under the highest category of the offence, the bill proposes. Under the Bill, offence means any sacrilege, damage, destruction, defacing, disfiguring, de-colouring, de-filling, decomposing, burning, breaking or tearing of any holy scripture or part thereof. The offences punishable under this Act shall be cognisable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable and will be tried by a session court. The investigation of the offence under this Act shall be conducted by a police officer not below the rank of deputy superintendent of police, as per the Bill. Once passed, this legislation will be implemented in the entire state of Punjab. The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force, it said. It is not the first time a bill has been introduced to impose stricter punishments on perpetrators of sacrilegious acts. In 2016, the then SAD-BJP government introduced the IPC (Punjab Amendment) Bill, 2016, and CrPC (Punjab Amendment) Bill, 2016, recommending alife sentence for sacrilegious acts against the Guru Granth Sahib. The Centre later returned the bill, saying that, given the secular nature of the Constitution, all religions should be treated equally. In 2018, the Amarinder Singh government had passed two bills - the Indian Penal Code (Punjab Amendment) Bill, 2018', and 'the Code of Criminal Procedure (Punjab Amendment) Bill 2018', which stipulated a punishment of up to life imprisonment for injury, damage or sacrilege to Guru Granth Sahib, Bhagavad Gita, Quran and the Bible. However, the two Bills did not get with the President's assent and were returned. Following the discussion on Tuesday in the House, the Bill is expected to be sent to a select committee for taking the opinion of stakeholders. Mann had earlier said that the state government would seek the opinion of all stakeholders and religious bodies for the proposed legislation, indicating that it would not be enacted immediately. The bill deals with an emotive issue in Punjab, as there has been a demand from various quarters for stringent punishment for acts of sacrilege against religious texts after the incidents of desecration of the Guru Granth Sahib in 2015 in Faridkot. With the enactment of the law, the State seeks to further strengthen the ethos of communal harmony, brotherhood, peace, and amity, a government spokesperson told news agency PTI. It will also act as a strong deterrent against anti-social and anti-national activities by ensuring severe punishment for perpetrators of this heinous crime, said the spokesperson. There have been numerous incidents in the past involving the sacrilege of Guru Granth Sahib and other revered granths, deeply wounding public sentiments and causing unrest in society, the spokesperson said. Over 100 incidents of sacrilege have been reported in the past five years alone, according to the state Intelligence Department. In 2016, desecration of the Quran was reported in Malerkotla and later in Sangrur; torn pages of Guru Granth Sahib were found in a park in Amritsar in 2018, leading to protests; and a gurdwara was vandalised in Tarn Taran and Guru Granth Sahib was desecrated in 2018. While sections 298, 299 and 300 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, address such issues, they do not prescribe sufficiently stringent penalties to serve as an effective deterrent. However, until now, no specific legislation existed that directly addressed offences against 'holy granths', often resulting in leniency or evasion of serious action by culprits, said the spokesperson. The enactment of the law seeks to further strengthen the ethos of communal harmony, brotherhood, peace, and amity. This new legislation aims to fill that legal void by criminalising and prescribing punishments for acts of sacrilege across all sects and faiths.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Sharp decline in state MGNREGS job creation, shows 4-yr low
1 2 Jaipur: The employment generation under MGNREGS in Rajasthan showed a sharp decline until June in the current fiscal year (2025-26) compared to the previous fiscal periods. The scheme generated 9.71 crore persondays until June 2025-26, marking a substantial decrease from 13.99 crore persondays recorded up to June 2024-25. Similarly, the figures stood at 13.61 crore persondays up to June 2023-24, while 13 crore persondays were registered up to June 2022-23. According to officials in the rural development department, under the current BJP regime, there is no proper monitoring of the scheme even though there is a huge demand for work in the villages. The approved labour budget for the financial year 2025-26 is 12.5 crore, which is much less than what was approved initially in the previous financial year (2024-25). Last year (2024-25), the approved labour budget till the end of the financial year was 27 crore. "The new norm here, which is not to spend more than 60% of the approved budget, sends a clear message that the BJP govt does not want to show any interest or give priority to MGNREGS. As per the Act, there is no budgetary constraint in MGNREGS. This is very bad for the state's rural employment scenario and rural economy. The money that is meant for the state is not coming," said social activist Nikhil Dey. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo "There are several issues related to NREGA work in Rajasthan. First, people are demanding work in villages, but they are not getting work. Second, in many gram panchayats, workers have demanded unemployment allowance in the absence of work, but they have not received that as well. As a union, we have also filed an application on behalf of the workers to pay unemployment allowance to NREGA workers. Third, in many places, Mates have not received payment for the past two years. This is the reason why many are not willing to work as Mates. Finally, there are other technical complications pertaining to a cap on 20 activities under NREGA," said Mukesh, a member of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan. Nirma Kanwar, from Kookar Kheda gram panchayat in Rajsamand's Bhim block, said, "When we go to apply for work, they don't give us any. The village secretary says there is no budget. Budget is an issue, they say. When we do get work, we have to travel 4-5 km by pick-up truck to reach the site. Currently, out of 150 members in our union, only 30 are working, while the rest are sitting idle." "We electronically removed 5-6 lakh fake names from the NREGA list, saving us Rs 2,600 crore. Recently, we received Rs 1,000 crore for the material component from the Centre, and around Rs 4,000 crore is still pending," said I P Agarwal, SE, EGS, Rajasthan.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Bar code: Will MRP rules curb inflated label prices?
The Centre is looking to make pricing of retail goods more transparent and consumer-friendly through a potential overhaul of the maximum retail price (MRP) system, five people aware of the matter said. The Union consumer affairs department has sounded out industry associations, consumer bodies and tax officials about the plan on 16 May, the people cited above said on the condition of anonymity. While the intention is to prevent manufacturers marking up retail prices steeply, some believe the proposal may erode pricing freedom. Retail outlets are currently free to charge any amount up to the maximum printed on the label, and manufacturers do not need to justify how the MRP is arrived at. According to one of the five people mentioned above, the consumer affairs department is looking into whether there should be guidelines on linking MRP to the cost of making and marketing items including essential commodities, packaged goods, and daily use consumer products. To be sure, the proposal is still in its early stage, and the date for the follow-up meeting is yet to be decided. Price-setting Under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009, the department of consumer affairs has the mandate to regulate weights, measures, and labels on packaged goods to ensure accuracy, transparency, and consumer protection. However, the Act does not empower the department to prescribe a pricing formula. Responding to a question about setting MRP under the new regime, a second person said, 'The standard cost will be decided in consultation with all stakeholders. Industry and consumer groups have been asked to give their suggestions to fix the MRP in a way that is not deceptive. The proposal is meant for most of the consumer goods." A ministry communication titled 'Hybrid meeting to discuss the declaration of exaggerated MRP on packaged commodities" said consumer affairs secretary Nidhi Khare would chair the meeting on 16 May. The meeting discussed irrational pricing, and industry executives and consumer groups were urged to come up with suggestions to make the pricing mechanism more consumer-friendly and "aligned with the current taxation system," said the third person. 'Such anomalies, including that of differential pricing, are expected to be addressed through amendments or stricter enforcement under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009, which empowers the ministry of consumer affairs to act against unfair pricing and deceptive practices," the third person added. MRP meeting Representatives of industry organizations such as FICCI, Assocham, Confederation of Indian Industry, PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the Retailers Association of India, as well as officials from the Goods and Services Tax Council and legal metrology controllers from all states and union territories attended the meeting, said the third person, who attended the meeting. Queries emailed to all of the above remained unanswered. The meeting also discussed so-called differential pricing, when the same product carries different MRPs depending on the location or sales channel. Most developed countries don't have a concept of MRP, and let market forces set prices. While some nations, like India, mandate MRP declaration, the actual price is determined by the manufacturer, with exceptions for essential goods where governments might regulate pricing. 'Not price control' 'The idea behind the proposal is to check unfair trade practices," the second person said. "For instance, if a product has an MRP of ₹5,000 but is sold at ₹2,500 after a 50% discount, the question arises—why was such a high price printed on the tag in the first place? If the retailer is earning a profit by selling it at ₹2,500, the original MRP appears inflated. Does that mean the 50% discount was merely a tactic to attract consumers? We are exploring all such cases in consultation with the industry, especially since the retailer is legally allowed to sell the product at its declared MRP." According to a fourth person, the objective is not to control prices as such, but to ensure that pricing is based on reasonable cost-plus margins. Cost-plus pricing is when the sale price is determined by adding a fixed percentage (markup) to its total cost of production and distribution. "A formula is likely to be worked out to keep MRPs within a fair range that ensures both consumer affordability and manufacturer profitability," the person added. Market efficiency Industry representatives did not see any need for changing the current system. 'It is widely acknowledged that market-driven pricing serves consumers better and supports economic and market efficiency. We have long embraced a free-market approach and the government has judiciously limited price regulation to certain essential commodities like pharmaceuticals. Experience shows that a controlled economy does not serve the interests of the consumer," said Piruz Khambatta, chairman of Rasna Group, who earlier headed a CII committee on food processing. Another industry executive said on the condition of anonymity that the term MRP indicates the maximum price at which a product can be sold and it enables dealers in certain markets to give customers a discount. The person said that linking retail price to costs will prompt some businesses to discontinue certain products, which will affect their availability to the consumer, defeating the very purpose of price regulation. This trend was seen in the pharmaceutical industry wherein a cost-plus pricing mechanism existed in the past. Guardrails in place Some believe there are already mechanisms available to check any malpractice. 'There's a need to be very clear about what the government is trying to address here, and what the actual market failure is. If input costs are low but consumer prices remain high, it suggests that certain intermediaries may be making super-normal profits. There are already mechanisms in place to deal with this such as the Competition Commission of India, or GST enforcement, to check collusion or lack of competition," said Amol Kulkarni, director of research at CUTS International, a non-governmental organisation. 'Instead of regulating MRP or delving into manufacturing-level pricing, which may have unintended consequences; we should strengthen these existing tools. Such interventions could create implementation challenges and confusion among consumers, especially in a price-sensitive country like India. It might also reduce pricing flexibility for companies, affect market access, and limit product choices," Kulkarni added. Tax links Also, any significant change to the MRP mechanism will require coordination with the ministry of finance, particularly to realign the Goods and Services Tax (GST) structure. At present, GST is levied on the transaction value, which may not always be the MRP. 'Since the introduction of GST in 2017, we can't say that MRPs are necessarily high or arbitrary or vary for different places—because there's no legal binding on manufacturers to explain or justify pricing, unless the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) intervenes," said Ashim Sanyal, CEO of Consumer Voice, a consumer rights organization. 'In the pre-GST era, taxes were levied on the MRP itself—both central and local. This made companies cautious about increasing MRPs, as higher prices directly meant higher tax outgo. It acted as a natural deterrent to inflating prices. With the current system, where GST is applied at the transaction level, manufacturers have greater pricing freedom. In effect, consumers today are at the mercy of companies putting any amount as MRP—which remains legal under existing norms," Sanyal said. 'Linking GST to MRP, rather than transactional value, may appear consumer-friendly on the surface, but it's fraught with complications. It risks distorting pricing freedom and adding unnecessary compliance burdens," said Utkarsh Sinha, managing director of Bexley Advisors, a boutique investment banking firm. Gireesh Chandra Prasad contributed to the story.
