top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 4:59:11 pm

Speculations of ‘Operation Tiger’

Mumbai: Recent disqualification of former Mumbai Mayor Vishakha Raut and senior corporator Deepak Sawant has sent shockwaves through the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), sparking speculation of a targeted municipal sequel to the Shiv Sena split. With a surge of election petitions now threatening dozens of elected representatives, whispers of a new form of calculated “Operation Tiger” are growing louder. Many suspect this is a strategic move to dismantle the Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray...

Speculations of ‘Operation Tiger’

Mumbai: Recent disqualification of former Mumbai Mayor Vishakha Raut and senior corporator Deepak Sawant has sent shockwaves through the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), sparking speculation of a targeted municipal sequel to the Shiv Sena split. With a surge of election petitions now threatening dozens of elected representatives, whispers of a new form of calculated “Operation Tiger” are growing louder. Many suspect this is a strategic move to dismantle the Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray (UBT) faction’s remaining stronghold in the civic body. Recent action against Raut and Sawant, whose Other Backward Classes (OBC) caste certificates were invalidated, reveals a broader vulnerability. According to BMC data, a staggering 79 election petitions are currently active against corporators across various parties. The charges primarily challenge the authenticity of caste verification certificates, but also include discrepancies in election affidavits concerning declared properties and income. While the sheer volume of petitions against the UBT camp is alarming, civic authorities note that filing a petition does not automatically result in disqualification. The process requires exhausting several legal and administrative steps. Even after a ruling by a caste scrutiny committee or judicial authority, the urban development department must formally issue a gazette notification before a seat is declared vacant. The timing of these petitions has fueled intense speculation. Against the backdrop of the ongoing Supreme Court hearings regarding the original Shiv Sena’s party name and election symbol, analysts suggest rival factions are leveraging these petitions. This municipal “Operation Tiger” appears designed to either legally disqualify embattled UBT members or pressure them into defection to avoid a public unseating. If these petitions lead to widespread disqualifications, the UBT faction risks losing its position as the largest opposition bloc, fundamentally altering the balance of power in Asia’s richest civic body. Election petitions against BMC corporators Political Party: Active Petitions Shiv Sena (UBT): 24 Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP): 18 Congress: 10 Shiv Sena (Shinde): 7 AIMIM: 7

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