Cong struggles to finalise candidate for Shivajinagar; BJP mulls fielding Roshan Baig’s kin

Thiruvananthapuram, Feb 6: The 105-year-old Bageerathi Amma who scripted history when she appeared for her fourth standard exam in last November becoming the oldest learner of the Kerala State Literacy Mission has passed her exam with 74.5 per cent marks.

This grandmother from Parakulam in Kollam district of Kerala Bageerathi Amma has six children and 16 grandchildren.

Speaking to news agency ANI, CK Pradeep Kumar, district co-ordinator of State Literary Mission said on Wednesday, "Bageerathi Amma has passed her exam with 74.5 per cent marks. It is really an inspiration for others to follow her and continue their education," he said.

Ms Bageerathi had to stop her education at the age of nine when she was in Class 3 as she had to take care of her younger siblings.

Her yearning to continue her studies was fulfilled with the help of officials of the Literary Mission who helped her to realize her dreams. She scored 205 marks out of a total of 275 in the fourth standard equivalency examination.

The Kerala State Literacy Mission Authority is an autonomous institution under the General Education Department, Government of Kerala.

The programme aims to develop literacy skills through continuing education, provide chances of each and everyone interested in learning, enable the learners to make use of their learning in their daily life and ensure Secondary-level education to the whole of Kerala.

The main beneficiaries of this programme are illiterates, neo-literates, school drop-outs and those interested in lifelong education.

Newsroom, May 26: A migrant worker died of hunger while a 10-month-old boy suffering from fever and breathing difficulties died negligence in two separate incidents onboard Shramik Special trains in Uttar Pradesh.

The 46-year-old dead migrant worker’s nephew, who was accompanying him, said that the victim had not eaten anything in the last 60 hours.

Raveesh Yadav said that no food or water was provided on the train, which they had boarded from Mumbai to travel to their native place in Jaunpur district in Uttar Pradesh.

Yadav and his uncle were working as construction workers in Mumbai.

Yadav told the paper that the train had left the Lokmanya Terminal in Mumbai, at 7pm on May 20 and arrived at its final stop, Varanasi Cantonment station, at 7.30am on May 23.

“But my uncle, who was complaining of hunger and pain all over his body, fainted half an hour before we reached Varanasi Cantonment and died within a few minutes,” Raveesh was quoted as saying.

He added that he and his uncle were hungry when they boarded the train but could not find food or water to buy.

Railways’ apathy

Meanwhile, the family of 10 month old child, who died in the train, alleged that the railways did not arrange for a doctor despite their repeated pleas.

The railway doctors had been moved to Covid-19 hospitals and by the time a doctor was provided at Tundla railway station, it was too late, the report quoted the child's grandfather, Dev Lal, as saying.

Lal said that the family members had tried to speak to the GRP at many stations, including at Aligarh, where the train had halted. "But they showed no interest and said any help would be available only in Tundla,” Lal said.

Railways officials then took the kin to a quarantine centre in Tundla, as they suspected that the baby had died because of the novel coronavirus.  It was only on Monday that the incident came to light when another individual at the quarantine facility intimated journalists after the condition of the child's mother worsened.

Last November, the mother of the child, Priyanka Devi of Bihar's Notan village in West Champaran, had gone to visit her parents who reside in Noida with the baby, who was then just four months old. Her husband Pramod Kumar is a farmer, the report added.

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.