Sachin Tendulkar’s Rajya Sabha Nomination : Is he a Face Saver for the Congress ?

sachin

The world stands divided on the nomination of Sachin Tendulkar to the Rajya Sabha. Though the political class have by and large welcomed his nomination, many have questioned this timing of his nomination. While the Congress, the UPA allies and the CPM have welcomed this decision as very good step while BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad said “Parliament is a serious business and one would expect Tendulkar to devote some time to Parliament”.

India’s sporting heroes have given a mixed reaction. Former soccer star Baichung Bhutia said joining politics was apersonal decision of Tendulkar, but added that the country needed dedicated and honest politicians like Tendulkar, who commands the respect of every Indian sports fan. Former cricket captain Dilip Vengsarkar remained sceptical about Tendulkar being able to devote his time for parliamentary proceedings when he is playing every format of the game.

“I don’t know whether he has time to do that, because I think he is playing international cricket, he is playing in all formats of the game, whether he will have time to do that? Whether he will have time to attend the Parliament? I really cannot say anything on this,” said Vengsarkar.

Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev on Saturday accused the UPA government of trying to divert attention from its poor performance by nominating Sachin Tendulkar for Rajya Sabha. Addressing a press conference, Baba Ramdev said the government is only trying to improve its image by way of such a move.

Sachin Tendulkar needs to have a serious chat with his handlers. Like a prize horse, he is being groomed and taken around stud farms as a marketing tool in sport, business and now Parliament. Sadly, his moves continue to live out other people’s dreams, creating unending debates about his actions on and off the cricket field following the script written by those who would use him for their own narrow ends.

But scratch deeper and the stench of cynicism hits you. A ruling party reeling under corruption charges, with inefficiency as its watchword and policy paralysis as its manifesto is in urgent need of shifting the focus from an old story which has re-emerged: Bofors, the 25-year old scandal. When you can’t change the logic of an argument, change the argument itself. Ride piggy-back on the character and record of one of the whitest reputations in the country.

It serves a two-fold purpose. It wins brownie points among large swathes of the population, and establishes, or at least suggests that the greatest cricketer in the cricket-mad country is a Congressman. Perception is more powerful than reality, after all. It has meant that Tendulkar has endorsed not just the politics of a limping party, he has also raised the credibility of one of its chief fixers Rajiv Shukla, better described as Shukla the Unctuous. And we have not even got to the question of how a man who is still an active cricketer is expected to attend Parliament even occasionally.

The identity of Sachin Tendulkar has been one of the most unifying, non-controversial and down-to-earth individual who have won the world for the nation and its people. Fans and even those who do not follow or do not support Cricket – admire Sachin for his character, achievements and contributions to the Indian Sporting World. However, his recent visit to 10, Janpath to meet Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and the news of his nomination to the Rajya Sabha has in a way stunned the world. First, many questioned if he was going to retire from the Cricketing field? When the answer to this query came out as a negative one, People Questioned how is he going to carry on both the works – playing as well as attending the Parliament ?

Tendulkar’s image took a blow this past year as he appeared to be chasing records with a passion that pushed into the background the needs of the team. Again, perception may have overwhelmed reality, but by picking and choosing and hanging on in a format of the game where the World Cup win might have come as a logical climax, Tendulkar has done his cause no good. Men like Anil Kumble, Rahul Dravid, Sourav Ganguly who have stuck their necks out on occasion on matters of principle and in the cause of the game, are clearly better choices as Parliamentarians. But then the exercise is not so much about getting the best men for the job as getting the biggest name with the added advantage of being a non-rocker of boats. In his 23-year career, Tendulkar has not taken a stand on any issue, choosing his version of courage over conviction. Perhaps Tendulkar will surprise us all in the Rajya Sabha. Perhaps his greatest contribution to the country will be made here. Perhaps he is now pursuing the Bharat Ratna with as much determination as he pursued his 100th 100.

On previous occasions when magnanimous personalities like Lata Mangeshkar were nominated for the same job, they had a poor record in attendence as well as actions in the Parliament. Cricket fans are divided with their opinions whether Sachin should have waited for his Retirement to make this move so that he performs and justify his nomination.

Till recently, whether senior Sachin and Laxman should retire on the footstep of Dravid and let the new players take the responsibility was heatedly debated by the media as well as the cricket fraternity. Sachin’s response that he has no plans to retire did silence that question, however this new development is surely going to bring back those debates once he fails to deliver on the pitch or fails to attend the Parliamentary Sessions.

Either way Sachin can be sure of such a situation very soon where he would need to handle enormous pressure from the media, fans, politicians as well as the people of this country.

Succession to the property of a Hindu Male

Succession to the propertyThe Hindu Succession Act, 1956, is a law that was passed by the ‘Parliament of India’. The preamble of the Act signifies that an Act to amend and codify the law relating to intestate succession among Hindus. The Act lays down a uniform and comprehensive system of succession whereas attempt has been made to ensure equality inheritance rights between sons and daughters. It applies to all Hindus including Buddhists Jains and Sikhs. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 preserves the dual mode of devolution of property under the Mitakshara School. The joint family still devolves by Survivorship with this important exception that if a Mitakshara Coparcener dies leaving behind mother, widow, daughter, daughter’s daughter, son’s daughter, son’s son’s daughter, son’s widow, son’s son’s widow, or daughter’s son his interest in the joint family property will devolve by succession.

Succession to the property of a Hindu Male

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 deals with the inheritance to

a) The separate properties of a Mitakshara male,

b) The separate and coparceners properties of a Dayabhaga male, and

c) The undivided interest in the joint family property of a Mitakshara Coparcener.

The Act does not apply to the property of a Hindu who is married under the Special Marriage Act to a non -Hindu.

Heirs of a Hindu Male

The heirs of Hindu male fall under the following categories:-

1) Class I heirs,

2) Class II heirs,

3) Agnates,

4) Cognates, and

5) Government.

Class I heirs:-

The property of a Hindu Male dying intestate would be given first to heirs within Class I. They are:

i. Mother,

ii. Widow,

iii. Daughter,

iv. Son,

v. Widow of a predeceased son,

vi. Son of a predeceased son,

vii. Daughter of a predeceased son,

viii. Widow of a predeceased son of a predeceased son,

ix. Daughter of a predeceased son of a predeceased son,

x. Son of a predeceased son of a predeceased son,

xi. Daughter of a predeceased daughter, and

xii. Son of a predeceased daughter.

Some new heirs are added by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. They are:

i. Son of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased daughter,

ii. Daughter of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased daughter,

iii. Daughter of a predeceased son of a predeceased daughter, and

iv. Daughter of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased son.

Shares of Class I heirs :

Section 10, Hindu Succession Act deals with the distribution of the property of the propositus, among class I heirs. The rules are:

A.] Sons, daughters and the mother of the propositus each take one share.

For example:-

If ‘P’ dies leaving behind his Mother ‘M’, two sons S1 and S2 and two

Daughters D1 and D2, each of the above heirs will take one share, i.e., 1/5th

-‘M’ will take 1/5th ;

– D1 and D2 each will also take 1/5th &

– S1 and S2 each will take one fifth.

B.] Widow takes1 share. If there are more than one widow, all of them together take one

Share and among themselves they divide it equally.

For example:-

‘P’ dies leaving behind a widow, ‘W’ and three daughters ‘D’, ‘D1’, and

‘D2’. Here each will take one share, i.e. 1/4th to each.

-‘W’ will take 1/4th,

-‘D’, ‘D1’ &‘D2’ each will take 1/4th .

C.] Among the heirs of the branches of a predeceased son, son of a predeceased son of a

Predeceased son and predeceased daughter, so here the doctrine of representation applies

i.e. heirs in each branch would take the same share which their parent would have taken.

So, we see above three rules in the following example:

If ‘P’ dies leaving behind son ‘S’, widow of a predeceased son ‘S1’, ‘SW’,

Predeceased daughter’s son and daughter ‘DS’ and ‘DD’, predeceased son’s

Predeceased son’s widow ‘SSW’, his daughter ‘SSD’ and his son ‘SSS’.

Distribution is first to be made at a place where branches come into existence.

There are four branches, each will take 1/4th share i.e.

– ‘S’ will take 1/4th .In the branch of ‘S1’ there is only one heir ‘SW’, she

representing ‘S1’ will take 1/4th .

– In the branch of predeceased daughter, there are two heirs, they representing her

will take 1/4th and between themselves divide it equally, with result that ‘DS’

will take 1/8th and ‘DD’ will take 1/8th .

– In the branch of predeceased grandson, there are three heirs, representing him

they will take 1/4th & among themselves share it equally, with the result that

‘SSW’, ‘SSD’&‘SSS’ each will take 1/12th.

Class II heirs and their shares:

If there are no heirs in Class I, the property will given to the heirs within Class II. They are divided into nine categories. The rule is that an heir in an earlier category excludes heirs in later category. Further all heirs in one category take simultaneously per capita share. They are as follows:

1] Category I –

a) Father.

2] Category II –

a) Son’s daughter’s son.

b) Son’s daughter’s daughter.

c) Brother.

d) Sister.

3] Category III –

a) Daughter’s son’s son.

b) Daughter’s son’s daughter.

c) Daughter’s daughter’s son.

d) Daughter’s daughter’s daughter.

4] Category IV –

a) Brother’s son.

b) Brother’s daughter.

c) Sister’s son.

d) Sister’s daughter.

5] Category V –

a) Father’s father.

b) Father’s mother.

6] Category VI –

a) Father’s widow. [Step mother].

b) Brother’s widow.

7] Category VII –

a) Father’s brother.

b) Father’s sister.

8] Category VIII –

a) Mother’s father.

b) Mother’s mother.

9] Category IX –

a) Mother’s brother.

b) Mother’s sister.

The rule of share in Class-II heirs is that each will take per capita including widow.

Agnates and Cognates:

Next heir of Hindu male is ‘Agnates and Cognates’. In it first preference is given to ‘Agnates’ & then ‘Cognates’. The rules for determining who are agnates & cognates are the same; so are the rules relating to distribution of property among them.

Agnates mean when a person traces his relationship with another through males, he or she is an ‘Agnates’. For instance brother, brother’s son, son’s son, son’s son father, father’s father, father’s mother, father’s father’s father & mother, son’s daughter, son’s son’s daughter………. etc are agnates.

On other hand cognates means whenever in the relationship of a person with another, a female (or more than one female) interverence anywhere in the line, one cognate to another. For instance sister’s sons & daughters; daughter’s sons & daughters; mother’s mother & father; father’s mother’s father & mother; mother’s father’s son & daughter………..etc are all cognates.

Government:

If a Hindu male leaves behind neither class I, nor class II, nor any agnates, nor any cognates upon his death, then, his entire property lapses to the government. This is called as “Escheat”. When government takes his property as heir, it takes with subject to all the obligations and liabilities of propositus.

Succession to a Mitakshara Coparcener’s Interest

The Section 6 of the Act has been extensively amended by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005; while recognizing the rule of devolution by Survivorship among the members of the coparcener makes an exception to the rule in the proviso.

According to proviso, if the deceased has left a surviving female relative specified in class I or a male relative specified in that class who claim through such female relation, the interest of a deceased in Mitakshara Coparceners property shall devolve by testamentary of instate succession under the Act and not as Survivorship.

Certain exceptions:-

If , and the heirs are both male and female, the female heir is not allowed to request partition until the male heir chooses to divide their respective shares. If this female heir is a daughter, she has the right to reside in the home if she is unmarried, divorced or widowed.

After the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005; Section 6, the difference between the female and male inheritor has been abolished . Now even female inheritor [daughter] can also claim partition of the ancestral property.

Further any person who commits murder is disqualified from receiving any form of inheritance from the victim.

If a relative converts from Hinduism, he or she is still eligible for inheritance.

Amendments

The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, allowing daughters of the deceased equal rights with sons. In the case of coparcenary property, or a case in which two people inherit property equally between them, the daughter and son are subject to the same liabilities and disabilities. The amendment essentially furthers equal rights between males and females in the legal system.

With the reference book: – ‘Family Law’ of Dr. Paras Diwan.