S.N. Chishty of the Ajmer Dargah reacts to the controversy over naming him as heir.
During the 306th Urs of Khawaja Garib Nawaz Ajmer Dargah, a controversy broke out over announcement of the heir by the Dargah Dewan or the “Sajjadanashin”, Syed Zainul Abedin Ali Chishty. The Dargah Dewan had announced his son Syed Nasiruddin Chishty as his heir, which was contested by the Khadims (servants) and the Gaddinashins of the Dargah.
Speaking to The Sunday Guardian, S.N. Chishty, the heir of the Ajmer Dargah, denied any advisory being issued to the Dewan by the Ministry of Minority Affairs. Excerpts:
Q: The Ministry of Minority Affairs (MoMA) had issued an advisory to the Dargah Dewan following the controversy that started on Urs this year. Has the Dargah Dewan made any changes post that?
A: There was no advisory issued to the Dargah Dewan by anybody. It is not even possible to do something like that. The Dargah Dewan has never met the Minority Affairs Minister to talk on this issue, neither have I have any knowledge of any such advisory. There were some people who had gone and met the minister in April to talk about development issues of the dargah. There they might have mentioned about the controversy, but there was no advisory issued to anybody. The dargah has been smoothly functioning and there is no rift.
Q: What about the clashes between the Khadims and the Dargah Dewan following the Ghusal ceremony during the Urs celebration? Were those clashes not real?
A: There are close to 5,000 Khadims who facilitate in one way or the other the smooth functioning of the dargah. But many of these Khadims are not well educated. During the Urs, my father, the Dargah Dewan, announced me as his heir. But the mainstream media, while reporting the event, misused words and wrote that I have been announced as the “Sajjadanashin”. This created confusion among the Khadims who wondered how can there be two Sajjadanashins at the same time, which is why they intervened during the Ghusal ceremony and barred me from entering the sanctum sanctorum. The truth is that my father is the Sajjadanashin and I am his heir. I cannot become the Sajjadanashin until his death. It should be noted that when the dewan announced me as his heir, Sajjadanashins from other dargahs in Bareilley, Nizamuddin etc, were also present there. They are witness to whether the Chishty sect rules were followed in announcing me as the heir of the dewan.
Q: Why was this not made clear right after the controversy erupted?
A: The local newspapers did write about it. The mainstream media did not cross check with us.
Q: But some gaddinashins and Khadims have objected to the Dewan’s legal right to announce an heir. They have contested that the Dargah Act does not allow it. Your comments.
A: These are baseless allegations. We have not violated the law. Everything has been done in accordance with the secular law as well as the traditions of the Chishty sect. The 1987 Supreme Court judgement in Syed Saulet Hussain vs Syed Ilmuddin case had already settled the issue of accession. The judgement said, “The scope of provisions of Section 13 appears to be limited. The Dargah Committee is only entitled to accord recognition as Sajjadanashin to the person legitimately entitled to succeed to the office.” Paras 15,16,17,19,20 and 24 of this judgement are enough to prove that the Dargah Dewan has every right to announce his heir which is hereditary and primordial in nature; the role of the dargah committee is limited to ratifying the succession and nothing more than that and the Dargah Dewan shall be the dewan till the moment of his death. Only after his death, the heir becomes the Sajjadanashin.
Q: Why would Minority Affairs Minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi issue advisory to the dewan if there were no rules violated?
A: We have never received any advisory, verbal or written. Minister Naqvi is a good man. He is doing well in managing his ministry. However, his subordinates are ill-informed people. They misguided him.