'..Hindutva govt..', Nitish Rane backs village banning Muslim traders
text_fields
Pune: BJP minister from Maharashtra, Nitish Rane, who is notorious for his anti-Muslim statements, questioned the Block Development Officer of Ahilyanagar for staying a resolution taken by a village to ban Muslim traders during an event.
Rane fired in the open that the BDO should remember that a Hindutva sarkar is in power in the state. He added that he urges the village to pass the resolution again, and if every single villager signs it, the BDO cannot reject it.
“The BDO should remember that a Hindutva sarkar is in power in Maharashtra. Though the resolution passed by the Madhi gram panchayat has been stayed by the BDO, I urge the villages to pass the resolution again. If all villagers sign the resolution, then how will the BDO reject it,” TIE quoted the controversial minister’s statement during his visit to the village.
It was on February 22 that the gram panchayat of Madhi village in Pathardi taluka passed a resolution banning Muslim community traders from setting up stalls during the annual Madhi Chi Yatra, which began on February 28.
Hailing the Villagers’ decision as “historic”, Rane said that the hardcore Hindutva supporters had been awakened in the village. The gram sabha’s decision will provide direction to the nation. If the Hindu religion is challenged, then such a decision will be taken across Maharashtra, the minister ranted.
Backing the decision, the District Guardian Minister Radhakrishna Vikhe-Patil said that the gram sabha “is well within its constitutional rights to pass such a resolution imposing the ban”. He claimed that the Supreme Court has acknowledged the right of the gram Sabha.
It was after the Ahilyanagar Zilla Parishad CEO Ashish Yerekar’s order to conduct an inquiry into the validity of the gram sabha’s resolution that the BDO Shivaji Kamble ruled it unconstitutional. He said that he conducted the enquiry and found that the sabha lacked the required quorum as per the government guidelines. Also, when the resolution held 116 signatures, 16 of them could not be confirmed. There were other deficiencies, too, which all led to deeming the resolution unconstitutional.