Question

Consider the following statements:
I) In a recent Supreme Court verdict pronounced by Justice Markandeya Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra, the court upheld the constitutionality of the Haj subsidy.
II) Muslims are not the only beneficiaries of the secular state’s generosity. Hindus have also received substantial financial support from the Government.
With reference to the statements mentioned above, which of the following is correct?
A) I only
B) II only
C) Both I and II
D) Neither I nor II

Answer 1

Hint: The Haj subsidy was first implemented in 1932 when the British government provided for a government-funded Haj council and named Bombay and Calcutta as two ports from where Muslims could leave upon their pilgrimage.

Complete answer:
Option A) I only: This option is incorrect as along with statement I, statement II is also correct as both the Hindus and the Muslims received benefits from our secular country.
Option B) II only: This option is incorrect as along with statement I, statement II is also correct as, in 2011, a historic verdict upholding the constitutionality of the Haj subsidy was pronounced by Justices Markandeya Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra.
Option C) Both I and II: This option is correct as in our constitution, Article 27 says: " No person shall be compelled to pay any taxes, the proceeds of which are specially appropriated in payment of expenses for the promotion and maintenance of any particular religion or religious denomination." The solicitor Prafull Goradia had protested that though he was a Hindu, he had to pay direct or indirect taxes, part of which was utilized by the government to subsidize Haj, which was done by Muslims alone. Disregarding the appeal, the Bench said; "In our opinion, if only a small part of any tax collected is used for providing some conveniences or facilities or concessions to any religious denomination that would not be in violation of Article 27 of the Constitution."
Option D) Neither I nor II: This option is incorrect as both statements I and II are correct. In our secular country, both the Hindus and the Muslims are their beneficiaries. Also in 2011, a historic verdict upholding the constitutionality of the Haj subsidy was pronounced by Justices Markandeya Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra.

Hence the correct answer is option 'C'.

Note:
- The Supreme Court of India, in 2012, ordered that Haj subsidy should end by 2022. The Supreme Court found that Hajj by Indian Muslims is subsidized to a generous degree by the Indian Government. The Court decided that this endowment isn't just unlawful however conflicting with the lessons of the Quran. - Significant analysis has been evened out against this training, both by Hindu associations that went against state financing of the private journey outside India and by Muslim pressing factor gatherings. Our secularism orders regard for all religions and not preferring a specific whole gang religion as the recipient under our sacred plan. For instance, the arrangement for devas reserve under article 290-A of the constitution.