New Delhi, July 7: Ajay Rai, the President of the Uttar Pradesh Congress, along with senior leader Hannan Mollah from the Communist Party of India (Marxist), has criticized the central government over issues related to the Ram Mandir donation controversy, the Agniveer scheme, and the political landscape in Uttar Pradesh.
During discussions on the Ram Mandir donation issue, Ajay Rai stated, “Recent developments concerning the trust have affected public confidence. The acceptance of the resignation of the concerned official indicates that serious questions have arisen regarding the matter.”
He alleged that multiple individuals are involved in the controversy and called for a fair investigation. Rai emphasized, “Our party does not trust the current functioning of the trust. We demand that the Ram Mandir Trust be dissolved and a new arrangement be established, including the Shankaracharyas from all four Peeths, prominent religious leaders, and local representatives from Ayodhya. This will help restore the faith of the devotees.”
He also claimed that a comprehensive investigation into temple-related matters could reveal numerous irregularities. Rai insisted that not only should donations be scrutinized, but also land-related issues, and strict action should be taken against anyone found guilty.
Meanwhile, CPI(M) leader Hannan Mollah commented on BJP National President Nitin Naveen’s visit to Ayodhya without visiting the Ram Mandir, stating, “Lord Ram is the center of faith for millions. The BJP has politicized the Ram Mandir issue, and now the public is naturally questioning such matters.”
Regarding the BJP’s claim of forming the government in Uttar Pradesh again, Mollah remarked that while political leaders make their claims, the final decision rests with the public. He noted that electoral outcomes will be determined by the people’s mandate, not merely political statements.
Responding to potential changes in the Agniveer scheme, Mollah stated that his party has opposed this initiative from the beginning. He argued that a four-year service period is not in the interest of soldiers or the army, as previously, soldiers had the opportunity for longer training and service, which strengthened the military’s capabilities.
Mollah expressed concern that a large number of youths would face uncertainty regarding their futures after a four-year service. He suggested that if the government is considering changes to allow for longer service, it would be a positive step. The government should review this scheme based on experience.
My name is Ganpat Singh Choughan. I am an experienced content writer with 8 years of expertise in the field. Currently, I contribute to Udaipur Kiran & Daily Kiran, creating engaging and informative content across a variety of categories including technology, health, travel, education, and automobiles. My goal is to deliver accurate, insightful, and captivating information through my words to help readers stay informed and empowered.
