top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 4:29:04 pm

Monsoon Malaise

The substantial showers over Maharashtra this year have predictably demonstrated that it is not the skies but the government that has failed the state. The intense downpour once again exposed the frailty of the infrastructure that the ruling establishment has been celebrating. From Mumbai’s paralysed roads to the shocking deaths in open manholes sans guardrails, to the collapse of transport links between Mumbai and Pune, the rains have held up an unforgiving mirror to official complacency....

Monsoon Malaise

The substantial showers over Maharashtra this year have predictably demonstrated that it is not the skies but the government that has failed the state. The intense downpour once again exposed the frailty of the infrastructure that the ruling establishment has been celebrating. From Mumbai’s paralysed roads to the shocking deaths in open manholes sans guardrails, to the collapse of transport links between Mumbai and Pune, the rains have held up an unforgiving mirror to official complacency. For a city that witnesses monsoons every year, Mumbai’s monsoon paralysis can scarcely be described as inevitable. Roads have disappeared beneath the floodwaters and commuters have been left stranded. These are not natural disasters but administrative failures. The Pune-Mumbai Expressway, the state’s most important transport corridor, was partially shut after a concrete pillar fell near the newly inaugurated Missing Link section. Opened barely two months ago, the 13-km engineering showcase was presented as a symbol of Maharashtra’s modern infrastructure ambitions. It promised shorter travel times and smoother connectivity through the Sahyadris. Instead, the first meaningful encounter with the monsoon has raised uncomfortable questions over the quality of execution. Was there a comprehensive structural assessment of the project before it was opened? Were engineers confident that it could withstand the very weather conditions for which such infrastructure is designed? These are not partisan questions to be merely asked by the Opposition, but matters of public safety. More worrying is the cascading effect of these failures. With the Missing Link closed, the old Mumbai-Pune highway disrupted and Tamhini Ghat also rendered unusable, connectivity between Maharashtra’s political and commercial capitals has been severely compromised. Legislators themselves reportedly face uncertainty over reaching Mumbai for the ongoing Assembly session. If the state’s elected representatives struggle to move across Maharashtra, one can only imagine the plight of ordinary citizens whose livelihoods depend on functioning roads, reliable transport and basic civic services. Infrastructure earns its reputation during crises, not during inaugurations. Roads are built for rainy days and bridges are meant to withstand storms. Drainage systems exist precisely because monsoons are neither rare nor unexpected. Maharashtra has not been surprised by an eclipse or an earthquake. It has been visited by the same seasonal rains that return with remarkable punctuality every year. Invoking climate change cannot become an alibi for poor planning, weak oversight and inadequate maintenance. Resilient infrastructure is the minimum standard that citizens deserve. The first weeks of the monsoon have delivered an unmistakable verdict. Maharashtra’s infrastructure has failed its annual examination. The government can no longer hide behind the clouds. Monsoons are annual appointments, not surprise inspections. If the state cannot prepare for the one disaster it knows is coming every year, it forfeits the right to claim competence.

Sacred Attire

Updated: Jan 30, 2025

The Siddhivinayak Temple Trust’s recent decision to implement a dress code prohibiting short skirts, torn jeans and other revealing attire is a necessary move to uphold the sanctity of religious spaces. Temples are spiritual spaces where devotees seek solace, offer prayers, and connect with the divine. Temples are not mere tourist attractions but sacred sanctuaries. The least that visitors can do is dress accordingly.


The Jagannath temple in Puri, Odisha, and the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan have already implemented similar rules, reflecting a growing recognition that religious spaces require a modicum of decorum. In the case of Siddhivinayak, the temple attracts thousands of devotees daily, many of whom have expressed discomfort over attire that they feel clashes with the temple’s spiritual ambience.


Few would question the need for decorum in a courtroom, a government office, or even an upscale restaurant. Yet, when religious institutions enforce dress codes to preserve their sanctity, a chorus of indignation often rises in the name of personal freedom, with such ‘critics’ arguing that such rules reflect moral policing or an imposition of traditionalist values.

But this argument confuses religious sanctity with public space liberalism. No one is being compelled to enter the temple, and those who do should respect the customs that govern it. Even in non-Hindu religious spaces, dress codes are the norm. One does not enter a gurdwara without covering their head, nor a mosque or church dressed in attire deemed unsuitable for prayer. The sanctity of a religious institution should not be sacrificed at the altar of modern whims.


To dismiss this as an encroachment on personal liberties is to misunderstand the nature of such spaces. Religious sites operate under different expectations than public thoroughfares or commercial hubs. They are designed for reflection, devotion, and ritual. While Indian society has rightly evolved towards greater personal freedom in many spheres, faith-based institutions must be allowed to maintain traditions that are integral to their identity. The temple trust has made it clear that its goal is not to impose regressive restrictions but to ensure that all visitors feel comfortable and that the sanctity of the temple is upheld.


Moreover, the argument that religious sites must remain entirely open-ended in their dress codes simply does not hold water. Many of the people who object to these restrictions would scarcely question the need for appropriate attire at a formal event or while meeting a dignitary. The principle is the same -respect for the setting dictates the mode of dress. Those who seek to frame this as a battle between liberalism and conservatism fail to grasp that such measures are about propriety, not repression.


In an era where the lines between cultural expression and decorum are increasingly blurred, it is worth remembering that not every rule is an infringement on liberty. If people can abide by dress codes in secular spaces, they should extend the same courtesy to places of worship.

Comments


bottom of page