Gorakhpur tragedy: Dr Kafeel Khan slams Yogi Adityanath for telling ‘blatant lies’

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 4: The investigation into the incident of violence at Jamia Millia Islamia during an anti-citizenship law protest was at a crucial stage, the Centre told the Delhi High Court on Tuesday.

The submission before a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar was made by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta while seeking more time to file a report regarding the probe.

Taking note of the submission, the bench granted the Centre time till April 29 to file a reply.

During the hearing, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for some students of Jamia, said 93 students and teachers filed complaints about alleged attacks on them by police but no FIR has been filed against the agency till date.

The other lawyers for the petitioners alleged that the government has not complied with the court order to file a response within four weeks of the last date of hearing on December 19.

The bench, however, declined to pass any interim order and granted time till April 29 to the government to file a reply.

Malappuram, Jun 5: A lawyer has filed a complaint with Superintendent of Police, Malappuram against BJP leader Maneka Gandhi and others for allegedly indulging in a hate campaign against Malappuram district and its residents.

Advocate Subhash Chandran, who hails from Malappuram, on Thursday filed a complaint seeking registration of FIR against former Union Minister Maneka Gandhi and others for allegedly indulging in a hate campaign against Malappuram and the residents of the district.

The complainant alleged that the campaign against the district was very derogatory and with a malafide intent.

The complaint stated that the unfortunate death of an elephant in Mannarkkad, Palakkad District dominated social media conversations in the last two days but a group of people deliberately added communal colour into it only to spread hatred against Malappuram, which is a Muslim majority district in Kerala.

It also stated that the elephant in question died on May 29, 2020, in Palakkad not in Malappuram as claimed by a section in social media users. Prominent news outlets operating from the South also reported that the elephant died after consuming explosive-laden pineapple in Palakkad.

The complaint also named political commentator, Tarek Fatah, for allegedly starting a hate campaign against the district and the minority community.

It alleged that Union Minister Maneka Gandhi made false and frivolous allegations against the district of Malappuram and its residents.

Chandran, through the complaint, prayed to the district police chief to register an FIR against Maneka Gandhi and others under Section 153A, 120B etc. of Indian Penal Code.

An elephant had died after she ate the pineapple stuffed with crackers and forest officials said that it died standing in river Velliyar after it suffered an injury in its lower jaw.

The elephant was seen standing in the river with her mouth and trunk in the water for some relief from the pain after the explosive-filled fruit exploded in her mouth.