2-yr-old TN boy trapped in abandoned borewell for 3 days found dead

Thiruvananthapuram, Jun 6: The Sabarimala Temple in Kerala is set to reopen from June 14 for devotees for monthly pooja and festival.

The temple will be open for the five-day monthly rituals in the Malayalam month of Midhunom that begins on June 15. From June 19-28 is the Sabarimala festival

A virtual queue system has been put in place in which 200 people will be allowed to register within an hour, Devasom Minister Kadakampally Surendran said.

To avoid crowding, only 50 devotees will be allowed to be present in front of the temple.

Before entering the premises, people will be scanned in Pampa and Sannidhanam. As a precautionary measure, people have been asked to wear mask and sanitation would be carried out at regular intervals.

Notably, no accommodation will be provided to the devotees in Sabarimala.

According to the Devasom Minister the administration has made two slots for the temple visit-- 4 am to 1 pm and 4 pm to 11 pm.

Also, the vehicles will only be allowed till Pampa. People coming from other states are required to register at government COVID Jagrata pass registration portal. Moreover, Appam and Arvana will be provided only through online booking.

Also, the devotees coming from other states will have to upload Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) labs certificate as a proof that they have not been infected with the lethal infection.

Also for the Guruvayoor Temple, the district collector, police and temple administration will hold a meeting to decide on the re-opening of the Temple. Here too devotees have to get themselves registered online.

In a single day, 600 people would be allowed to offer prayers at this shrine. Each hour, 150 people will be allowed to enter the premises.

Also, the time slot will be provided to people. In one batch 50 people will be allowed for 15 minutes inside the premises

Not only that, but marriages can also again be solemnised with divine blessings at the Guruvayoor temple. The administration will allow only 60 marriages in a day.

Weddings were stopped at the temple, due to the COVID-19 lockdown that was in place since March 24.

A marriage group should not have more than 10 people, including the bride and the groom and it is mandatory for the group to abide by the social distancing norm.

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.