JNU student leader Umar Khalid attacked in Delhi

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, Jun 18: Reliance Industries Ltd on Thursday said it has sold a 2.32 per cent stake in its digital unit to Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF) for Rs 11,367 crore, taking the cumulative fund raising to about Rs 1.16 lakh crore in two months.

Starting with Facebook Inc on April 22, Reliance has sold almost 25 per cent of equity in Jio Platforms - the maximum reports suggest the company intends to dilute to financial investors.

The investment by Saudi sovereign wealth fund is "at an equity value of Rs 4.91 lakh crore and an enterprise value of Rs 5.16 lakh crore", the company said in a statement.

With this investment, Jio Platforms has raised Rs 115,693.95 crore from some of the leading global investment powerhouses at a time when the world is deeply impacted by the coronavirus pandemic, resulting in a recession kind of environment for the global economy.

"With the addition of PIF's investment, Jio Platforms has established partnerships with a marquee set of global financial investors, who will contribute to establishing the Digital Society vision for India," the statement said.

Jio Platforms houses India's biggest telecom firm by subscribers, Reliance Jio. With more than 388 million users, Jio has forced out several rivals and driven consolidation in the sector since entering the market in 2016 with free voice services and cut-price data.

Over the past two months, billionaire Mukesh Ambani's oil-to-telecom conglomerate has announced the sale of about $14 billion of assets, completed a Rs 53,124 crore rights issue and slowed the run rate of new investment by a quarter.

These will help Reliance meet its target of paying off Rs 1.61 lakh crore of net debt by the end of the year.
This is PIF's largest investment into the Indian economy to date.

Ambani, chairman and managing director of Reliance Industries, said, "We at Reliance have enjoyed a long and fruitful relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for many decades. From oil economy, this relationship is now moving to strengthen India's New oil (data-driven) economy, as is evident from PIF's investment into Jio Platforms."

Yasir Al-Rumayyan, governor of PIF, commented: "We are delighted to be investing in an innovative business which is at the forefront of the transformation of the technology sector in India. We believe that the potential of the Indian digital economy is very exciting and that Jio Platforms provides us with an excellent opportunity to gain access to that growth."

"This investment will also enable us to generate significant long-term commercial returns for the benefit of Saudi Arabia's economy and our country's citizens, in line with our mandate to safeguard and grow the national wealth of the Kingdom," he said.

The transaction is subject to Indian regulatory and other customary approvals.

Morgan Stanley acted as financial advisor to Reliance Industries and AZB & Partners and Davis Polk & Wardwell acted as legal counsels.

Prior to this deal, Reliance had sold 22.38 per cent of Jio Platforms to investors including Facebook Inc, securing Rs 104,326.95 crore in eight weeks.

Facebook kicked off the party, investing Rs 43,573.62 crore for a 9.99 per cent stake on April 22. This was closely followed by a further Rs 60,753.33 crore in investment.

Silver Lake - the world's largest tech investor - bought a 1.15 per cent stake in Jio Platforms for Rs 5,665.75 crore on May 4. It invested another Rs 4,546.80 crore for additional 0.93 per cent stake on June 5, taking its total holding to 2.08 per cent
Private equity KKR and Vista Equity Partners have taken 2.32 per cent stake each for Rs 11,367 crore apiece. KKR invested in Jio Platforms on May 22 while Vista invested on May 8.

Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund Mubadala Investment Co picked up 1.85 per cent in Jio Platforms for Rs 9,093.60 crore on June 5. Abu Dhabi Investment Authority on June 7 invested Rs 5,683.50 crore for a 1.16 per cent stake in Jio Platforms.

On May 17, global equity firm General Atlantic picked up 1.34 per cent stake in Jio Platforms for Rs 6,598.38 crore.

Global investment firm TPG on June 13 picked up 0.93 per cent for Rs 4,546.80 crore while L Catterton bought 0.39 per cent for Rs 1,894.50 crore.

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.