RSS mulls holding 'moral' classes for kids at 5,000 centres every Sunday

Bengaluru, Jun 12: The Central government has identified Karnataka's Udupi and Yadgir among the "emerging districts of concern" for COVID-19 in the country. Confirming the development, a top official of the state health department said, "they (centre) had reviewed these two districts a few days back...there was a sudden spurt of cases due to Maharashtra returnees turning positive." Sources said union cabinet secretary Rajiv Gauba, during a recent video conference with state chief secretaries and health secretaries, had shared his thoughts on the issue.

According to the information shared, districts with more than 400 cases, half of which was reported post-May 18 lockdown relaxation, have been identified as "emerging districts of concern." They are concentrated in the seven states/union territories of Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Karnataka, Jammu and Kashmir and Haryana. "Udupi and Yadgir from Karnataka, along with Gurugram in Haryana and Kolhapur in Maharashtra have 90 per cent of the cases recorded after May 18," they said.

As on June 11 evening, Udupi had a total of 969 positive cases, out of which 619 are active, while 735 positive cases have been reported in Yadgir, out of which 626 are active. The two districts had reported a total of only 11 cases each as on May 18. While Udupi till last evening had seen 349 discharges, it was 108 in Yadgir.

Both districts have reported one COVID related fatality so far. As of June 11 evening, cumulatively 6,245 COVID-19 positive cases were confirmed in the state, which included 72 deaths and 2,976 discharges.

Mysuru, May 1: Four people who brought a dead man’s body from Mumbai for cremation in his native place in Mandya district in Karnataka have tested positive for Covid-19 virus, and now the administration is trying to find out if the man himself had been an undetected positive.

According to Mandya district deputy commissioner M V Venkatesh, the deceased man was a 53-year-old native of B Kodagalli of Pandavapura taluk, Melkote hobli in Mandya district. He died after suffering a heart attack at the U N Desai government hospital in Mumbai on April 23.

The cremation took place outside the man's native village after the local administration refused to allow it inside the village.

Wanting the final rites performed in his native place, the man’s family got the body embalmed and procured all the medical records and certificates from the hospital and brought it in an ambulance belonging to the Desai government hospital.

When they reached Pandavapura taluk in Karnataka on the evening of April 24, the local administration did not allow the body to enter the village but allowed the relatives to cremate it outside the village.

And since the family had come from Mumbai, the district administration quarantined all seven of the man’s relatives, and their samples were sent for testing on 28 April.

The results showed that the deceased man’s 25-year-old son, daughter-in-law, daughter, and two-year-old grandchild are positive for Covid 19. All of them have been admitted at the Mandya Institute of Medical Sciences although they have no symptoms.

Deputy commissioner Venkatesh said that in the Desai hospital records in Mumbai there was no mention whether or not the man had been tested for Covid-19. “We are writing to Desai hospital to clarify if the deceased person was tested for Covid 19. It is also possible that the family got infected by the man’s son who works in the loan department of ICICI Bank in Mumbai and visits several offices in different areas of Mumbai,” he said.

The man’s ancestral B Kodagalli village now has been sealed off. Though tests done on other members of the family have come back negative, the Mandya administartions plans to repeat their tests.

So far 26 people have tested positive for Covid 19 in Mandya district.

Chennai, Feb 5: In order to ensure housing for all, the Madras High Court has proposed ban on non-resident Indians from purchasing houses in India, prohibit speculative sale, and impose 100 per cent extra stamp duty on purchase of second house.

The court on its own impleaded the Union housing and finance ministries as party respondents.

It has directed them to answer a series of questions including as to how many families have basic amenity of housing in India as well as in Tamil Nadu, population and housing ratio in the country and in the state, when 'Housing for All' mission of the central government would be achieved.

"Why the government does not consider imposing such restrictions to control escalation of house prices and to provide a house to every family in the country, a division bench of Justice N Kirubakaran and Justice Abdul Quddhose wondered.

Directing the authorities to inform as to whether the central and state have got special schemes to provide housing for the marginalized and economically weaker sections including SC/ST communities, the bench has also sought the details of the number of families that possess more than one house.

"Why the governments do not restrict families/individuals from purchasing/possessing more than one housing unit/flat/plot till "Housing for all" is achieved?

Why not the government charge 100 per cent more or extra stamp duty to discourage buying more than one house by a family while purchasing second house?

Why not the government conditionally allow the families to purchase more than one house provided the said family pays 100 per cent extra statutory dues like property tax, electricity charges, water and sewerage charges on the second property?" the bench said.

This apart, the court also wanted the authorities to know as to why it should not prohibit the NRIs from purchasing houses in India to bring down the cost of housing.

Justifying its directions, the court said "Lakhs and lakhs of people are living on platforms, roads, and cement pipes, slums, under the trees and on banks of water bodies without proper shelter and basic amenities and safety."

It is true that the Centre had taken a policy decision to provide housing unit to every family.

It should be achieved at the earliest, the court said, adding it could become fruitful when restrictions are put on persons who hold more than one housing units.

The court passed the order while hearing an appeal moved by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board challenging a single judge order against acquisition of about 369 acres of private land in Thudiyalur and Vellakinar areas of Coimbatore for a housing scheme.