Rasul-Allah (peace be upon Him) used to perform 'ghusl' while sitting, as it is closer to modesty (more concealing for the 'awrah'). However, it can be performed while standing.
'Masah' can be performed on any type of socks that fulfil the following three conditions:
☛Are thick enough so that if water drops fall on the socks, the moisture cannot penetrate & reach inside.
☛Withstand a continuous walk of 1 or 2 miles without becoming torn; and
☛Are able to stay upright above ankle on their own without being tied on or using elastic band etc.
Unless one knows for sure that any socks fulfil all the three conditions mentioned above, one must not perform 'masah' on them.
'Shariat' considers one's health more important and allows 'masah' (wipe over) in such a condition. If even 'masah' is harmful, one is excused from that as well.
Responsibility of making 'adhaan' and 'aqaamah' should not be conferred on a person who does not sport beard in accordance with 'shari'ah'. However, one should remain quite if there is apprehension of creating dissent but if one considers appropriate to extend advice, such proposition should be explained calmly and with wisdom. Under the prevalent social degradation if almost everyone deserts certain 'sunnahs', even then one must not leave attending a congregational prayer. Offering a prayer in congregation is far better and more virtuous than offering it alone.
Indeed, according to 'Hanafi' jurists, Friday prayer cannot be performed in villages. In such a village, people should make 'adhaan' for 'Dhuhr salaat' and offer the prayer with 'aqaamah'. If everyone prays 'furada', their 'salaat' will be valid but they won't get the reward ('ajr') reserved for offering a prayer in congregation. If there is a 'masjid' (mosque) in the village and there is no apprehension of creating dissent ('fitna') i.e. everybody agrees to perform 'Dhuhr salaat' in congregation instead of the Friday 'salaat' then the 'Dhuhr salaat' should be offered in the 'masjid' itself. Otherwise 'Dhuhr salaat' can be performed in congregation somewhere else. If there is only one person, then he should say 'Dhuhr salaat' by himself. It is 'sunnah' (way of Rasul-Allah (peace be upon Him)) to pronounce 'adhaan'; however there is no 'aqaamah' before an individual person's prayer.
'Ulaama-e-mujtahideen' (jurist scholars) are of different opinion regarding 'adhaan' for 'Tahajjud' prayer. According to the 'Hanbali' jurists this 'adhaan' had not been abrogated and so they practise it. 'Hanafi' jurists on the other hand maintain that 'adhaan' for 'Tahajjud' prayer was practised during the early stages of Islam but was abrogated by Rasul-Allah (peace be upon Him) later on. So wherever Hanafi jurisprudence is practised/followed (including the Sub-continent), 'adhaan' is not pronounced for 'Tahajjud' prayer.
When the 'musafir imaam' completes his 'salaat' (comprising two 'rakaats' only), the 'muqeem muqtadi' should stand up and perform his 'qiyam' (standing quietly). 'Muqeem muqtadi' doesn't have to recite 'surah Al-Fatiha', just keep silently standing for as long as it takes to recite 'surah Al-Fatiha' or at least as long as it takes to recite 'subhaana rabbiyal A'laa' thrice and then perform 'ruku' (bowing low with hands on knees). Similarly offer the fourth 'rakaat'.
There was a time in the Subcontinent when it was governed by people who were not only knowledgeable in 'deen' (Islam) and injunctions of 'shari'ah' (Islamic law & jurisprudence) but also held them in high esteem. They practised religion in every aspect of life in letter and spirit, used to themselves lead Friday prayers in cities, and the people in villages just offered the routine 'Dhuhr' (mid-day) prayers on Fridays. Those values gradually declined and the masses as well as their rulers drifted towards secularism. People started perceiving many ill-practices, innovations and distortions as 'deen' because of lack of real knowledge and submission to personal whims. Consequently, it was around that time that the wrong practice of offering Friday prayers in villages got started. As far as justification for this violation is concerned, one can only say that there are so many other ills and practices in which people violate the real injunctions of 'shari'ah'. Whatever justification, though devoid of any true religious foundation, people think or cite for those violations can also be considered for this wrong practice as well.