15,000 pvt schools in Gujarat stop online classes after govt’s ‘no fee’ order

New Delhi, Apr 25: With 1,429 more COVID-19 cases reported in the last 24 hours, India's count of coronavirus cases has reached 24,506, said Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Friday.

Out of these, 18,668 patients are active cases and 5063 cases have been cured, discharged, or migrated.

The death toll stands at 775, with as many as 57 deaths reported in the last 24 hours.

According to the morning update by the ministry, Maharashtra continues to be the worst-hit State with 6,817 cases of which 840 patients have recovered and 301 patients have died.

Gujarat now stands in the second spot with 2,815 cases, of which 265 have recovered and 127 people have died. Meanwhile, Delhi's count stands at 2,514 of which 857 patients have recovered, while 53 patients have lost their lives.

Tamil Nadu's COVID-19 figure stands at 1,755 with 866 patients recovered and 22 fatalities. Rajasthan has reported 2,034 cases of which 230 have recovered and 27 patients are dead.

Madhya Pradesh has reported 1,852 positive cases so far of which 210 patients have recovered and 92 patients have lost their lives due to the virus. In Uttar Pradesh, as many as 1,621 people have confirmed COVID-19, of which 247 recovered and 25 people have succumbed to it.

In Kerala, which reported the country's first COVID-19 case, 450 people have been detected positive for coronavirus.

Mumbai, Apr 20: At least 53 media persons from Mumbai have tested positive for coronavirus, a city civic official said on Monday.

During a special camp organised at the Azad Maidan here on April 16 and 17 for COVID-19 testing of scribes, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) collected swab samples of 171 mediapersons, including electronic and print media journalists, photographers and cameramen.

“Out of the 171 mediapersons, 53 tested positive for coronavirus,” BMC spokesperson Vijay Khabale said, adding that most of those who tested positive are asymptomatic at present.

All the mediapersons found infected with coronavirus will be kept in isolation and a process was underway to find out suitable places to the purpose, he said.

Efforts were also on to trace their high and low risk contacts.

Till Sunday, Mumbai recorded 2,724 coronavirus cases and 132 deaths due to the disease.

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.