Mysuru royal family member asks villagers not to panic after her claim over 4,500 acres of land
Bengaluru (PTI): Pramoda Devi Wadiyar of the erstwhile Mysuru royal family on Monday said the residents of Siddayyanapura in Chamarajanagar district need not worry as she would not take any steps even if the land she has staked claim is found in the name of the royal family.
The assurance came after Wadiyar said over 4,500 acres of land in Siddayyanapura belonged to the royal family as per the agreement between the Maharaja of erstwhile Mysore and the Government of India in February 1951.
Recently when the state government moved ahead to declare Siddayyanapura as a revenue village, Wadiyar shot a letter to the Deputy Commissioner and Tehsildar of Chamarajanagar and other senior officials in the Government of Karnataka in this regard stating that the Mysuru royal family owns a parcel of land in the village, which they want to declare as a revenue village.
As the panicked villagers made a beeline before the Deputy Commissioner to resolve the issue and even claimed that the Mysuru Maharaja had gifted them land.
In order to clear confusion among people of Siddayyanapura, Wadiyar told reporters here, “We don’t know why the villagers are in fear. I am saying this now that they need not get scared now or even in future. I am giving them assurance that even if the Khatha comes in our name, they need not be afraid.”
She, however, complained that the Deputy Commissioner did not provide any document regarding the status of the property. Wadiyar wondered why people were in fear.
“I was away from the town and I was not aware of this issue at all. I learnt about this only when I read about it. I don’t know who created fear among them and I am not aware of what happened on the ground,” the successor of Mysuru royal family said.
Regarding the claim that the Mysuru Maharaja had given them land as gift, Wadiyar said, “If the Mysuru Maharaja had given them gift then do we need to snatch it back from them?”
She also said that the district authorities could have told her about the status of the land when they decided to make it a revenue village.
“Even if the land is transferred in our name, I will not create a situation that would scare them. I cannot give more assurance than this. We will do our best without the intervention of the State government, and there is no need for the government to intervene.
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 notice to Centre on PIL against Muslim personal law sections being 'discriminatory' against women
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the Centre's response on a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, on the ground that those are allegedly discriminatory against women.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Panchol took note of the submissions made by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who appeared in the matter for petitioners Poulomi Pavini Shukla and the Nyaya Naari Foundation, and issued a notice to the Union Ministry of Minority Affairs.
The plea says the current Shariat inheritance rules are "manifestly discriminatory" against women, often granting them only half or less of the share allocated to their male counterparts.
Bhushan said the 1937 Act violates Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution.
He said matters of succession are civil in nature and do not constitute an "essential religious practice" protected under Article 25.
"Saying women will get half or even less than half compared to male counterparts is discriminatory," the lawyer said.
