Delhi High Court issues notice on plea against govt’s policy to utilize consolidated fund for releasing salaries to Imams of Delhi Waqf Board

The Delhi High Court today issued notice on a plea challenging the Delhi government’s policy to utilize the consolidated fund of the state to release the salaries and honorarium to Imams and Muezzins of Delhi Wakf Board and Non Wakf Board.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora sought response from the Delhi government, its Finance and Planning departments and the Delhi Waqf Board.

The plea has been lodged by Rukmani Singh, a lawyer and social activist by profession, seeking to restrain the AAP led Delhi government and Waqf Board from providing salaries or remuneration to the Imams and Muezzins of the Board and Non Wakf Boards out of the consolidated fund of the State.

The High Court bench stated that the issue requires consideration and issued notice in the matter. The case is scheduled for hearing in July. The bench further impleaded Delhi government’s Revenue department as a party respondent in the plea after a verbal request was made by Delhi government’s standing counsel, Santosh Kumar Tripathi.

The petitioner in her plea contended that the practice adopted by the Delhi government to pay honorarium to few individuals of a particular religious community without considering the financial condition of individuals in the other religious community directly contravenes the secular nature of the State and violates Articles 14, 15(1) and 27, 266 and 282 of the Constitution of India.

The plea placed reliance on a Supreme Court ruling in All India Imam Organisation v. Union of India where it was ruled that it is the duty of the Wakf Board to harness resources to pay the Imams who perform the most important duty, namely of leading community prayer in a mosque.

The plea stated that in view of the foregoing, it is apparent that the act of the state is very well against the Constitutional canons as well as the judgment passed by the Supreme Court. Furthermore, it asserted that payment cannot be made to one particular sect of the religion from the consolidated fund of the state.

Leave a Reply