MP Pratap Simha’s Irresponsible attitude during central team’s visit is Condemnable: A.K Subbayya
Ponnampete, Sept 15: The irresponsible attitude displayed by MP Pratap Simha during the visit of the central team, which had come to assess the extent of damage caused by floods and landslides in Kodagu district, is most condemnable,” stated former MLA AK Subbayya.
In a release issued here on Saturday, he said that a central assessment team had visited Kodagu to assess the damage caused by natural disaster and recommend the central government for suitable compensation. MP Pratap Simha who was present on the spot when the central team visited Hebbatageri village near Madikeri, has attempted to divert the attention of the team by pointing to unrelated issues such as land transition, resort construction, etc. The MP has copied some of the environmentalists' readymade statements and tried to conceal the fact. It is not the job of Pratap Singh to do being an MP. Instead, this is an irresponsible attitude. This move of the MP is likely to prevent the fund that was supposed to come from the center, Subbayya expressed concern.
“MP Pratap Simha has done injustice to the Kodagu’s people and acted as an anti-people by diverting the central team’s attention to other issues instead of shifting their focus towards the losses and difficulties occurred in Kodagu and get the maximum possible relief fund from the center. It is a welcomable move that a local BJP leader openly condemned the act of the parliamentarian on the spot, “ Subbayya opined.
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.
SC refers petitions challenging Waqf Amendment Act 2025 to Justice BR Gavai’s bench
Hearing scheduled for May 15
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday directed that the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, be listed before a bench led by Justice B.R. Gavai. The decision was announced by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, who noted that Justice Khanna is nearing retirement and the matter requires an early hearing.
The case titled In Re: Waqf Amendment Act was heard by a bench comprising CJI Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan. The CJI stated that although he had reviewed the counter-affidavit filed by the Union government and the rejoinders submitted by the petitioners, he did not wish to reserve judgment at the interim stage. With the consent of all parties, including Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and A.M. Singhvi for the petitioners and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the Union, the matter was reassigned to Justice Gavai’s bench for hearing on May 15.
In previous hearings on April 16 and 17, the bench engaged in detailed discussions. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had raised strong objections to the omission of the ‘waqf by user’ provision, arguing that such waqfs — many centuries old — often lack formal registration documents. Solicitor General Mehta responded that the amendment was prospective and that registered waqf properties would not be affected.
The Court also took note of concerns about the inclusion of non-Muslim members in the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards. CJI Khanna pointedly asked whether non-Hindus are similarly included in bodies overseeing Hindu religious endowments. In response to these concerns, the Court suggested interim directions to prevent any significant changes, including a proposal that only Muslims (barring ex-officio members) should serve on the Waqf Boards and Council. It also indicated that court-declared waqf properties should not be denotified during the pendency of the case.
The Union government, through SG Mehta, assured the Court that no fresh appointments would be made to the Waqf bodies and that the status of existing waqf lands would remain unaffected. These assurances were recorded by the Court.
The petitions, supported by a wide array of individuals and organisations including MPs from AIMIM, RJD, SP, TMC, CPI, DMK, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, and others challenge multiple provisions of the Amendment Act.
Meanwhile, BJP-led state governments of Assam, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, and Maharashtra have filed intervention applications supporting the amendment.
The matter will now be heard on May 15 by the bench led by Justice Gavai.
_vb_42.jpeg)
