People have cancer because of their sins, this is divine justice: BJP Health Minister

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.

New Delhi, Feb 29: Former Union Minister M J Akbar told a Delhi court on Friday that journalist Priya Ramani had defamed him by calling him with adjectives such as 'media's biggest predator' in the wake of #MeToo movement in 2018 that harmed his reputation.

M J Akbar made the allegations before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vishal Pahuja through his lawyer during the final hearing of a private criminal defamation complaint filed by him against Priya Ramani. Akbar resigned as Union minister on October 17, 2018.

Ramani in 2018 accused Akbar of sexual misconduct around 20 years ago when he was a journalist.

Senior advocate Geeta Luthra, appearing for Akbar, said that the allegations were intentional and malafide.

“When you call someone media's biggest predator, it is per se defamatory. Calling a person with such adjectives is on the face of it defamatory. In the eyes of the people, Akbar's reputation was harmed... The per se effect was lowering of my (Akbar) reputation in the eyes of the right thinking members of the society,” she told the court.

She said there was no due process in the allegations. “It has a cascading effect. Embarrassing questions were asked. I (Akbar) am a person of greatest integrity... There was no due process in the allegations. You cannot just make allegation and let that person suffer,” she added.

Luthra said that if there was any grievance, it had to be raised then and there before the appropriate authority.

“We need to realise the effect has what we say or what we do. It's not like she went to any authority or raised any grievance. Opportunity was there, rights were there but to attack so person behind their back on social media...knowing that his whole life will be adversely affected? It's not right,” she said.

M J Akbar has denied all the allegations of sexual harassment against the women who came forward during #MeToo campaign against him.

Akbar had earlier told the court that the allegations made in an article in the 'Vogue' and the subsequent tweets were defamatory on the face of it as the complainant had deposed them to be false and imaginary and that an “immediate damage” was caused to him due to the “false” allegations by Priya Ramani.

Ramani had earlier told the court that her “disclosure” of alleged sexual harassment by Akbar has come at “a great personal cost” and she had “nothing to gain” from it.

She had said her move would empower women to speak up and make them understand their rights at workplace.

Several women came up with accounts of the alleged sexual harassment by M J Akbar him while they were working as journalists under him.

He has termed the allegations “false, fabricated and deeply distressing” and said he was taking appropriate legal action against them.

New Delhi, Jun 28: Home Minister Amit Shah on Sunday targeted former Congress President Rahul Gandhi, saying he was indulging in "shallow-minded" politics and making statements that make Pakistan and China happy when soldiers are fighting a spirited battle.

Shah said the government is ready for a discussion in Parliament about the situation from 1962 (when India-China war took place) and it is sad that a former president of a party making statements, which are being celebrated in Pakistan and China.

The Home Minister's comments came during an interview with ANI when he was asked about Rahul's "Surrender (Prime Minister Narendra) Modi" remarks while criticising the BJP-led government on India-China border row.

Rahul has been consistent in his criticism of the government on the handling of both Covid-19 situation and India-China border row, which escalated into a "violent face-off" earlier this month in which 20 Indian soldiers were killed.

"Let there be a robust debate in Parliament. Let us have one. Let us discuss from 1962. Nobody is scared of debate. But one should not make a statement that makes Pakistan and China happy when the soldiers are fighting a spirited battle and the government is taking strong steps," he said.

Asked whether India can handle the anti-India propaganda unleashed by Rahul's 'Surrender Modi' hashtag, he said the government is capable of handling it but it is a matter of introspection for the former Congress president and his party that their remarks are being used against the country.

Modi's remarks at an all-party meeting that no one has intruded into Indian territory triggered a controversy with a section arguing that it went against the previous statement of External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar.

Claiming that he could not advise Rahul as it is Congress' job to do so, he said the government has fought Covid-19 well but some people have a twisted way of seeing things. He said India fought well against Covid-19 and the statistics will speak for itself as it is much better compared to the world.

Shah said under Modi's leadership, India is going to win both the battles -- Covid-19 and India-China border row.

The Home Minister also refused to be drawn into a question on whether Chinese soldiers are holding on to Indian territory on the border at present, saying the government is doing enough to address border row with China.

"I don't want to do anything that goes against my primary aim of this interview (to highlight the steps taken to fight Covid-19 pandemic in Delhi) and create headlines that keep citizens further in fear," Shah said.

When pointed out that people are also in panic due to the border situation, he said the government has taken steps to address the situation and at an appropriate time he would make comments, if needed.

Asked about his tweets on Emergency, which was targeted by Congress asking whether there is democracy in the BJP, he countered it saying that BJP has presidents L K Advani followed by Rajnath Singh, Nitin Gadkari, Rajnath again, himself and now J P Nadda.

"After Indira-ji, was there any Congress President from outside Gandhi family? What democracy do they talk about? I did not do any politics during Covid-19. You look at my tweets of the past 10 years. Every June 25, I give a statement," he said.

"Emergency should be remembered by people as it attacked the roots of our democracy. No one should ever forget it. There should be awareness about it. It is not about a party but about the attack on the country's democracy," he said.