VHP members protesting against proposed Haj House building in Dwarka on 7th August, Image: Muslim Mirror
One hundred residents of the Dwarka area of New Delhi have condemned the letter sent by All Dwarka Residents Federation (ADRF) to the Lieutenant Governor, protesting the 2008 allotment of land for building a Haj House. They have criticised the communal content of the letter and asserted that ADRF does not represent all residents of Dwarka as claimed by the group and, “It is a small group out to foment trouble and incite hatred by provoking public disorder.”
As we had previously reported in SabrangIndia, ADRF’s letter had said that if the Haj House is allowed to be constructed in the area, law and order will be disturbed, there will be “every possibility of riots”, migration of Hindus and “repetition of situation like Shaheen Bagh, Jaffrabad (reference to the North East Delhi violence last year) and Kashmir.”
The president of the Federation, Ajit Swami, told SabrangIndia that if the government is allocating money, it should do it on something that can be used by everyone and not just benefit one community. He said that every individual’s money cannot and should not be used for the purposes of one community. Swami also said that traffic and parking issues can lead to violence and riots as several buses will enter Dwarka from Mewat, Chandigarh, causing chaos. The same points are highlighted in the statement issued by Dwarka residents countering them.
They have said that there are numerous festivals of Hindus and other religious groups on which both Centre and state governments spend substantially large sums of money every year, and even dedicate public resources. Their statement reads, “Chief among these is the four Kumbh Melas, held in Haridwar, Allahabad, Nashik and Ujjain. Millions of people attend each fair. To ensure that they go off smoothly, Central funds are routed through state governments to pay for construction on the mela grounds, facilities for pilgrims and security.”
In 2019, which was also the election year, the Uttar Pradesh government had reportedly allocated Rs. 4,236 crores to organise the Kumbh. The UP state BJP spokesperson Rakesh Tripathi had also justified the allocation and was quoted by FirstPost saying, “If you compare this budget with other global events of the world, like FIFA, you will find it a very small amount.” But this whopping amount was criticised by activists like Samina Bano who had said, “This figure is 80 percent of Uttar Pradesh’s total budget for the health sector. It is also approximately 25 percent of the total elementary education budget,” reported FirstPost.
The statement issued by the residents also reads, “Other pilgrimages attracting Central funds include the Kailash Manasarovar Yatra. The yatra is organised by the government, which spends money on security and health facilities for the pilgrims. Several states have explicit subsidies earmarked for various pilgrimages or religious events. The Madhya Pradesh government subsidizes a range of pilgrimages for senior citizens and their attendants under the Mukhyamantri Tirtha Darshan Yojana, including visits to Ayodhya, Mathura, the birthplace of Sant Kabir and St Thomas Church in Kerala. The Adityanath government also grants a Rs 10,000 subsidy to every pilgrim from the state going on the Sindhu Darshan in Ladakh, J&K.”
The point made by the residents of Dwarka is that public funds raised by central and state governments through direct and indirect taxes are contributed by Muslims too. “The money collected through taxes cannot be used only for one community. All communities including Hindus, Muslims, Jains, Sikhs, Christians & others have a right on the public money,” they say. They have also contended that Dwarka is well planned and connected with buses arriving from all over Delhi, Metro, flyovers and with well-constructed roads, it is easily accessible to everyone.
They have countered the issue raised by the ADRF’s letter about traffic and parking issues. It states that the government has planned to construct an exclusive Interstate Bus Terminus (ISBT) that will serve as a major transport hub for residents of Delhi and neighbouring states. It is expected to cater to over 2 lakh commuters daily and the plan is to have all inter-state buses from Haryana and Rajasthan to terminate here itself. This is also expected to have a footfall of 15,000-20,000 passengers daily.
On the other hand, all India number of Haj pilgrims is 1,46,000, out of which 20,000-25,000 go for Haj from the International Airport, located in Delhi. The footfall of relatives who come to see off and the Haj pilgrims is not more than 2,000 per day for a period of 15-20 days. They have said that, “It is convoluted logic that ISBT with an expected footfall of 2 lakh per day round the year won’t hinder the traffic but 1500- 2000 Haj pilgrims per day for 15-20 days will create traffic problems.”
The residents have called out the highly objectionable letter and claimed that it “denigrates Muslims and is spreading hatred against them.” Further, the 100 residents across Dwarka sectors have also demanded the local police authorities to take cognisance and file a case on the signatories of the letter for spreading hatred with the intent to cause public disorder and disharmony.
What does the law say?
Article 27 of the Constitution says, “No person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination.” Thus, the government, ‘constitutionally’, must not allocate money for any religious purpose or place, but that is far from reality.
There have been judgments in the name of preservation and maintenance of temples through government expenditure. Justice Arun Mishra’s (retired, and who is now the Chairperson of NHRC), last judgment was on the preservation of Mahakaleshwar temple at Ujjain. (Sarika vs Administrator, Mahakaleshwar, Civil Appeal No. 4676 of 2018).
It had held that “if only a relatively small
So, if government expenditure has been justified before, the demands and issues raised by the ADFR barely stand any ground. Articles 15 (right against discrimination), 25 (freedom of religion), surely does not permit us to see any difference between temples, mosques or churches.
The signatories are:
1. Abbimnyou Warikoo, Sector 7
2. Amartya Prakash, Sector 13
3. Ananya, Sector 3
4. Anjali Deshpande, Sector 7
5. Anjali Mehta, Sector 7
6. Anmol Mishra, Sector 7
7. Anuj Ahlawat, Sector 19
8. Anuradha GR, Sector 21
9. Anusha, Sector 13
10. Arjuna Vayalombrone, Sector 6
11. Arvind Kumar Agrawal, Sector 23
12. Barun Mita, Sector 12
13. Bernard D’Silva, Sector 6
14. Chahna, Sector 11
15. Chetna Singh, Sector 10
16. Devesh Mundepi, Sector 3
17. Dhruv Golani, Sector 23
18. Dikshant Sharma, Sector 13
19. Dr. Ranbir Sharma, Sector 13
20. Florence Fernandes, Sector 4
21. Gagan, Sector 13
22. Gauhar Raza, Sector 6
23. Gopa Kumar, Sector 12
24. Gopalji Pradhan, Sector 19
25. Gurinder Singh, Sector 2
26. Haridas T, Sector 1
27. Harsh Jain, Sector 13
28. J S Murthy, Sector 23
29. Jaimon Joseph, Sector 6
30. Kalyani V, Sector 7
31. KG Satheesh, Sector 6
32. KK Singh, Sector 19
33. Kislay, Sector 19
34. Krishna Sengupta Sector 4
35. Leena Dabiru Sector 4
36. Madhavi Kane Sector 6
37. Madhukar Varshney Sector 3
38. Madhuri Sector 3
39. Mamata Sector 7
40. Manjeet Kirbat Sector 4
41. Manoli Arora Sector 4
42. Mathew Abraham Sector 10
43. Melvin Diniz Sector 7
44. Mohd Azeemullah Sector 21
45. Mrs.Kanti Sharma Sector 13
46. Munish Kundra Sector 7
47. N. Raghuram Sector 18
48. Nazima shervani Sector 10
49. Nikhil Bisht Sector 13
50. Nischay Kumar Sector 19
51. PVS Kumar Sector 6
52. Parivartan Pandia Sector 22
53. Pathik Arora Sector 4
54. Pranjal Mukhija Sector 11
55. Priyanka Thakur Sector 20
56. Pulkita Sector 6
57. Queeny Pradhan Sector 19
58. Raghav Sector 13
59. Ramya Kannan Sector 18A
60. Ravindranath Sector 12
61. Reena Saxena Sector 22
62. Regina Rose Xaviet Sector 12
63. Richard Mahapatra Sector 8
64. Rishabh Sector 6
65. Roger Samuel Sector 8
66. S K Malik Sector 6
67. Sahil Dhawan Sector 12
68. Samkutty, Sector 1
69. Sanjeev Sector, 23
70. Santanu Sengupta, Sector 4
71. Sarim Ali, Sector 3
72. Sarim Ali Farooquee, Sector 10
73. Satya Narain, Sector 5
74. Saurav Sharma, Sector 18B
75. Seema Chelat, Sector 6
76. Seema Joshi, Dwarka 12
77. Shabnam Hashmi, Sector 6
78. Shameera Ashroff, Sector 6
79. Sheetal Gahlot, Dwarka Mor
80. Siddharth Saxena, Sector 12
81. Somya Singh, Sector 1A
82. Soumya Jayanti, Sector 23
83. Srishti Vohra, Sector 6
84. Srishti Vohra, Sector 6
85. Steve Mathew, Sector 10
86. Subash Karunakaran, Sector 7
87. Subir Banerjee, Sector 1
88. Subodh Mahanti, Sector 18A
89. Subrata Kumar Sahu, Sector 7
90. Sukumaran PB, Sector 15
91. Swati Arya, Sector 12
92. Sweta Singh, Sector 16
93. Tara Pillai, Sector 12
94. Terence D’Souza, Sector 4
95. Vasudevan, Sector 12
96. Vasudha Singh, Sector 18
97. Vinoy Thomas, Sector 9
98. Vipin Vaylombrone, Sector 6
99. Vivek Sachdeva, Sector 19
100. Yogesh, Sector 21
Related:
Haj House in Dwarka will lead to riots: Residents Federation write to Lt-Governor
UP: Right wing outfit Kranti Sena conducts drive to ban Muslim Mehendi artists and barbers
Jantar Mantar rally: BJP leader, SC lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay among six arrested
False history for a nation is like a false memory for an individual: Prof. Irfan Habib