Some significant points on Muslim Reservations by Dr Togadia
1. Religion based reservations are unconstitutional as many HCs have given judgments to this regard. 4.5% reservation to Muslims is religion based reservation.
2. Appointment of the Sachhar Committee is itself unconstitutional as its terms of reference are religion based. It is against all Supreme Court judgments on secularism (refer to the 2008 case in Del HC – petition against Sachhar Committee by Rashtriya Mukti Morcha, appeared for them : Advocate P N Lekhi, Justice Thakur & Justice Siddharth Mridul termed the Sachhar Committee ‘Unconstitutional move by the Govt.’)
3. Sachhar Committee report has no reference or study about the actual comparison between Muslim OBC’s educational & economic status and the same of Hindu OBC. The details of their survey limit themselves to Hindu Sc / Hindu OBC / Hindu others / but Muslim ALL. No Muslim OBCs.
4. If there is no study that proves that Muslim OBCs are far behind Hindu OBCs, then how & on what basis the Govt has been giving quota or preference to Muslim OBCs over Hindu OBCs? This itself it invalid & preposterous.
5. Per Sachhar Committee report itself Muslims in 9 states are educationally much more ahead than Hindus. Why should Muslims get benefit of any quota?
6. The methodology & sample sizes of the Sachhar Committee studies are not up to the international standards for any social or demographic survey. In this situation, any conclusion or recommendation thereof cannot be taken as valid.
7. Sachhar Committee’s conclusion that Muslims in Bharat are economically & educationally backward is invalid. National Sample Survey in 24 states & Union Territories prove that the average Muslim household at national level spends more ( Rs. 40,327) than the Hindu household (40,009) re annual household expenditure.
8. Incidents of infant & child mortality, degree of urbanization & average life expectancy at birth are the three internationally accepted parameters for economical status. In all these three Muslims are not backward. In urbanization Muslims are ahead with 36% than Hindus with 26%. In Life expectancy (crude death rate per 1000: 9.6 for Hindus & 8.9 for Muslims)
9. Sachhar Committee has taken population as the basis of the study & analysis as well as for recommendations. There is a norm for majority that is of 2 children whereas Muslims have exempted from this norm quoting their religion. In such situation, no facilities can be legally & socially given based on the population percentage because the growth rate of Hindus & Muslims re population is not at par due to governmental norms Vs Muslims’ religious vehemence. From 1961 to 2001 total population of India has grown by 134% while Muslim population has grown by 194% and consequently the share of the Muslim population was 10.7% in 1961 which has become 13.4% in 2001. In such a forced disparity on Hindus re population growth norms, Muslims should not be given any facility or quota based on their population. It is against any laws of democracy. The population growth difference between Muslims & non-Muslims was 15% in the decade of 1951 -1961 whereas it has become 50% in 1991-2001 decade. Their unlimited children cannot be burdened on Hindus who follow development norms generally of 2-3 kids.
10.If the Sachhar Committee is the study & comparison of Muslim & Hindu economic & social status then the said committee should have taken Hindu opinion & experience into consideration. DGP Ohri approached the said Sachhar committee three times, but the said committee purposely ignored the requests for a hearing & his written submission was not even considered in the final report. This means the said Sachhar Committee’s report is intentionally biased & one-sided.
Latest Articles from Bharath Focus
- Intolerant Intellectuals belittling Bharath; Why this sudden outburst? Suffering from Secular Syndrome? PART – 2
- Intolerant Intellectuals belittling Bharath; Why this sudden outburst? Suffering from Secular Syndrome?
- HK Exclusive : Hindutva ensures harmony and pluralism in Bharat; J.NandaKumar
- Martyred Col. Mahadik cremated with full military honours
- Cancer, cardio drugs on discount, Govt launches first AMRIT store
- Karnataka HC strikes down discriminatory Hindu Endowments Act
- Hindu Hruday Samrat Sri Ashok Singhal passes away
- ‘Culture is the expression of soul of the nation’: RSS Sah-Sarakaryavah Dattatreya Hosabale
- VHP Stages massive protest in Bengaluru, across Karnataka condemning attack on VHP activists, opposes Tipu Jayanti
- Bengaluru to host 5-day mega conclave Hindu Spiritual and Service Fair-2015
Did You Know?
A vast body of scientific information is hidden in ancient Hindu scriptures and Sanskrit texts. One such book is the celebrated commentary on the Rigveda by Sayana (c. 1315-1387), a minister in the court of King Bukka I of the Vijayanagar Empire in South India.
Sayana comments on a verse in Rigveda that Sun traverses 2,202 yojanas in half a nimesha. Yojana is an ancient Indian unit of length and nimesa is the unit of time. Upon conversion in modern units, this yields the value of 186,000 miles per second. Now it is well known that this is the velocity of light. Why would Sayana call this the velocity of Sun? It turns out that Sayana was following the ancient Indian tradition of codifying the knowledge. In this code Sun represents light.
In the modern times the speed of light was first determined in 1675 by Roemer. Until then light was taken to travel with infinite velocity. Even Newton assumed so.