HC reserves order on plea of 20 disqualified AAP MLAs

Agencies
February 28, 2018

New Delhi, Feb 28: The Delhi High Court today reserved its order on 20 Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLAs' plea challenging their disqualification in office-of-profit case. A bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Chander Shekhar kept its decision pending after the MLAs, Election Commission of India (EC) and other parties concerned concluded their arguments. "Arguments heard. Judgement reserved," the bench said. 

The MLAs had yesterday told the court that EC's order disqualifying them for allegedly holding office-of-profit was passed in "complete violation of natural justice" as they were not given the opportunity to explain their stand before the poll panel. The bench was also requested by the legislators to remand their case back to the poll panel with a direction to hear the matter afresh.

The MLAs had approached the high court challenging their disqualification after President Ram Nath Kovind gave his nod to the EC's recommendation.

Backing its recommendation to the President for AAP MLAs' disqualification, the poll panel had submitted that the legislators cannot claim that they were not holding office-of-profit. The EC had earlier claimed that the disqualified MLAs' plea was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed. The high court was hearing the plea on a day-to-day basis since February 7. The high court had on January 24 refused to stay the Centre's notification disqualifying them, but had restrained the poll panel from taking any "precipitate measures" such as announcing dates for bypolls to fill the vacancies.

The EC had on January 19 recommended the disqualification of 20 AAP MLAs - Alka Lamba, Adarsh Shastri, Sanjeev Jha, Rajesh Gupta, Kailash Gahlot, Vijendra Garg, Praveen Kumar, Sharad Kumar, Madan Lal Khufiya, Shiv Charan Goyal, Sarita Singh, Naresh Yadav, Rajesh Rishi, Anil Kumar, Som Dutt, Avtar Singh, Sukhvir Singh Dala, Manoj Kumar, Nitin Tyagi and Jarnail Singh. The president had accepted the EC's opinion the next day.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 20,2020

May 20: Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli on Tuesday asserted that Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura belong to Nepal and vowed to "reclaim" them from India through political and diplomatic efforts, as his Cabinet endorsed a new political map showing the three areas as Nepalese territory.

Addressing Parliament, Oli said the territories belong to Nepal “but India has made it a disputed area by keeping its Army there”. “Nepalis were blocked from going there after India stationed its Army,” he said.

“India has deployed its troops in Kalapani since 1962 and our rulers in the past hesitated to raise the issue,” he said, asserting, “We will reclaim and get them back.”

The prime minister asserted that the Nepal government will make political and diplomatic efforts to reclaim the territory.

Oli also expressed the hope that India will “follow the path of truth, shown by Satya Meva Jayate, which is mentioned in the Ashoka Chakra, the national symbol of India”.

The prime minister’s remarks came a day after the Cabinet headed by him endorsed a new political map showing Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura under Nepal’s territory.

Foreign Minister Pradeep Kumar Gyawali said the official map of Nepal will soon be made public by the Ministry of Land Management. The move announced by Gyawali came weeks after he said that efforts were on to resolve the border issue with India through diplomatic initiatives.

Nepal''s ruling Nepal Communist Party lawmakers have also tabled a special resolution in Parliament demanding return of Kalapani, Limpiyadhura and Lipulekh to Nepal.

The Lipulekh pass is a far western point near Kalapani, a disputed border area between Nepal and India. Both India and Nepal claim Kalapani as an integral part of their territory - India as part of Uttarakhand’s Pithoragarh district and Nepal as part of Dharchula district.

Gyawali last week summoned the Indian Ambassador Vinay Mohan Kwatra and handed over a diplomatic note to him to protest against the construction of a key road connecting the Lipulekh pass with Dharchula in Uttarakhand.

India has said that the recently-inaugurated road section in Pithoragarh district in Uttarakhand lies completely within its territory. Indian Army chief Gen MM Naravane last week said that there were reasons to believe that Nepal objected to India''s newly-inaugurated road linking Lipulekh Pass with Dharchula in Uttarakhand at the behest of "someone else", in an apparent reference to a possible role by China on the matter.

He said there was no dispute whatsoever between India and Nepal in the area and road laid was very much within the Indian side.

The 80-KM-long strategically crucial road at a height of 17,000 KM along the border with China in Uttarakhand was thrown open by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh earlier this month.

Nepal has raised objection to the inauguration of the road, saying the "unilateral act" was against the understanding reached between the two countries on resolving the border issues. China on Tuesday said the Kalapani border issue is between India and Nepal as it hoped that the two neighbours could refrain from "unilateral actions" and properly resolve their disputes through friendly consultations.

After the endorsement of Nepal’s new map senior ruling party leader and member of Nepal Communist Party Standing Committee Ganesh Shah said the new move may escalate unnecessary tension between Nepal and India at a time when the country is fighting the coronavirus.

"The Nepal government should soon start a dialogue with India to resolve the matter through political and diplomatic moves," he said.

The new map includes 335-km land area including Limpiyadhura in the Nepalese territory.

The new map was drawn on the basis of the Sugauli Treaty of 1816 signed between Nepal and then the British India government and other relevant documents, which suggests Limpiyadhura, from where the Kali river originated, is Nepal''s border with India, The Kathmandu Post quoted an official at the Ministry of Land Reform and Management as saying.

India and Nepal are at a row after the Indian side issued a new political map incorporating Kalapani and Lipulekh on its side of the border in October last year.

The tension further escalated after India inaugurated the road link connecting Kailash Mansarovar, a holy pilgrimage site situated at Tibet, China, that passes through the territory belonging to Nepal.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 4,2020

New Delhi, Mar 4: The government on Wednesday permitted NRIs to own up to 100 per cent stake in disinvestment-bound Air India.

The decision comes at a time when the government is looking to sell 100 per cent stake sale in the national carrier.

Union minister Prakash Javadekar said the Cabinet has approved allowing Non-Residents Indians (NRIs) to hold up to 100 per cent stake in Air India.

Allowing 100 per cent investment by Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) in the carrier would also not be in violation of SOEC norms. NRI investments would be treated as domestic investments.

Under the Substantial Ownership and Effective Control (SOEC) framework, which is followed in the airline industry globally, a carrier that flies overseas from a particular country should be substantially owned by that country's government or its nationals.

Currently, NRIs can acquire only 49 per cent in Air India. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the airline is also 49 per cent through the government approval route.

As per the existing norms, 100 per cent FDI is permitted in scheduled domestic carriers, subject to certain conditions, including that it would not be applicable for overseas airlines.

In the case of scheduled airlines, 49 per cent FDI is permitted through automatic approval route and any such investment beyond that level requires government nod.

On January 27, the government came out witha Preliminary Information Memorandum (PIM) for Air India disinvestment. It has proposed selling 100 per cent stake in Air India along with budget airline Air India Express and the national carrier's 50 per cent stake in AISATS, an equal joint venture with Singapore Airlines.

Under the latest disinvestment plan, the successful bidder would have to take over only debt worth Rs 23,286.5 crore while the liabilities would be decided depending on current assets at the time of closing of the transaction.

This is the second attempt by the government in as many years to divest Air India, which has been in the red for long.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 8,2020

New Delhi, May 8: The Supreme Court on Friday suggested that states should consider indirect sale and home delivery of liquor as per its statute and law to avoid crowding at liquor shops amid the ongoing coronavirus-induced lockdown.

A bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan refused to pass any orders on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking clarity on the sale of liquor and to ensure social distancing while it is being sold in liquor shops during the lockdown.

"We will not pass any order but the states should consider indirect sale/home delivery of liquor to maintain social distancing norms and standards," Justice Ashok Bhushan said while disposing of the petition.

The PIL, filed by one Sai Deepak, sought directions for closure of liquor shops for failing to enforce social distancing, which is essential to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

The petitioner told the apex court that he only wants that the life of common people is not affected because of crowding at liquor shops during COVID-19.

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, another judge in the bench, said that discussion on home delivery is already going on.

The top court, after hearing the petition complaining about flouting of safety norms at liquor shops, observed that it cannot pass any orders to different states but they should consider online sale and home delivery of liquor.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.