Chennai: The founder of the Isha Foundation, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, has come under fire from the Madras High Court for pushing young women to renounce their material lives even though he had arranged his daughter's marriage. The court questioned this while hearing a case filed by retired professor S. Kamaraj, who stated that his two highly educated daughters had been "brainwashed" into living permanently at the Isha Yoga Centre.
Judges S.M. Subramaniam and V. Sivagnanam's bench seemed uncomfortable when the two women—ages 42 and 39—appeared in court today. The two women argued, however, that they were not being kept against their will and were staying at the Isha Foundation of their own free will. The parents testified that their lives were permanently damaged because their daughters had "abandoned" them, and this was as much evidence as they had been claiming for the entire ten years of this lawsuit.
In response, the Isha Foundation made it clear that participants voluntarily join the group. "We honor personal preferences. People travel to Isha for a variety of reasons, including marriage and monastic life, but they are not forced to do either," a Foundation spokesman stated. They claim that there is only one case against the organization that is pending at the police stations right now, and that the court has halted another.
However, the court desired further investigation. It demanded a list of every case involving the Isha Foundation. The court's intimation implied, in a sense, that the investigation had been scoped up. Sivagnanam laughed, "We want to understand why somebody who arranged for his own daughter's marriage is encouraging other daughters to shave their heads and live like hermits."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
New Delhi, May 15 (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a fresh plea of Vodafone Idea seeking waiver of around Rs 30,000 crore adjusted gross revenue (AGR) dues.
A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih was urged by senior lawyer Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the telecom firm, that the plea needed an urgent hearing.
The telecom company has sought a waiver of around Rs 30,000 crore towards interest, penalty, and interest on penalty components of its AGR dues.
Rohatgi said the survival of the petitioner firm was crucial for maintaining competition in the telecom sector.
Now the Centre holds a 49 per cent stake in the company following a recent equity conversion of interest dues, he added.
The bench is likely to hear the plea on November 19.
The top court had previously refused to review its 2021 order rejecting the pleas of telecom majors including Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Idea for rectification of alleged errors in calculation of AGR dues payable by them.
A bench comprising former Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Abhay S Oka and Sanjay Kumar dismissed the pleas seeking review of the 2021 order in-chambers on January 28.
On July 23, 2021, the apex court dismissed their applications seeking rectification of the alleged errors in calculation of AGR dues.
The telecom companies argued that arithmetical errors in the calculation be rectified and there were cases of duplication of entries.
The top court in September 2020 fixed a time frame of 10 years for telecom service providers struggling to pay Rs 93,520 crore of AGR related dues to clear their outstanding amount to the government.
In its September 2020 order, the apex court said that telecom operators should make the payment of 10 percent of the total dues as demanded by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) by March 31, 2021 and the rest amount would be paid in yearly instalments commencing from April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2031.
The top court, which held the demand raised by the DoT with respect to AGR dues as final, said there should neither be a dispute raised by the telecom companies nor any re-assessment.
The apex court in October 2019 delivered its verdict on the AGR issue.
The DoT moved a plea in the top court asking for a staggered payment of the dues by telcos over 20 years.