Maharshi Dayanand University dress code 'diktat' enrages students

August 10, 2012

Rohtak, August 10: Commerce students of Maharshi Dayanand University are angry over the diktat by their head of department (HoD) against wearing jeans and tops. The students mostly girls accused the acting HoD, Mahender Singh Malik, of improper behaviour and using vulgar language in presence of girls.

The aggrieved students on Thursday submitted a written complaint to the vice-chancellor demanding action. Malik, clad in a kurta pyjama clarified that he just wanted students not to wear "obscene-looking dresses" and thus "advised them as a guardian".

He had taken over the charge of the department on Wednesday and reportedly directed students to wear a full-sleeved salwar kameej only. A student group said: "Immediately after taking over the charge, he started moral policing issuing verbal orders against wearing jeans, tops for girls and T-shirts for boys."

A second-year girl student alleged that as the chairman of admission committee, he refused to sign her admission form when she appeared before him wearing jeans and shirt on August 1 but admitted her the next day when she came dressed in salwar kameej. Another student said, "Last year, he kept on pressuring me on wardrobe and I had to complain to my parents. But he refused to listen to my parents."

In the written complaint signed by 94 students, they alleged: "He used vulgar language in front of girl students, smokes in the department in the presence of students and puts a lot of restrictions on girls."

"The vice-chancellor has assured the girls to look into the complaints and to take action in this regard," said registrar S P Vats, adding that there was no ban on wearing any kind of dress including jeans and tops in the university.

The registrar, however, clarified that some department like engineering, management and hotel management had a dress code.

woment


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.
Agencies
March 1,2020

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

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 9,2020

New Delhi, Mar 9: Petrol and diesel prices registered a drop across the country on Monday as global oil prices plummeted around 30 per cent after Saudi Arabia slashed prices and set plans for a dramatic increase in crude production in April.

In New Delhi, petrol price fell by 24 paise intra-day and stood at Rs 70.59 per litre. Diesel in the national capital was retailed at Rs 63.26 per litre on Monday as against Rs 63.51 on Sunday.

The retail price of petrol in Kolkata saw a drop of 23 paise to Rs 73.28 per litre. The diesel price fell by 25 paise in the eastern metropolitan city to retail at Rs 65.59 per litre.

In Mumbai, petrol price was Rs 76.29 per litre as against Rs 76.53 a day earlier. Diesel was retailed at Rs 66.24 per litre, 26 paise lower than on Sunday.

In Chennai, petrol was retailed at Rs 73.33 per litre, 25 paise lower than a day earlier. Diesel price saw a fall of 26 paise to retail at Rs 66.75 per litre in the southern metropolitan.

Global crude oil prices fell by as much as a third following Saudi Arabia's move to start a price war with Russia amid worries over the spread of coronavirus.

Brent crude futures were down 13.29 dollars or 29 per cent at 31.98 dollars a barrel by 04:33 hrs GMT after earlier dropping to 31.02 dollars, their lowest since February 12, 2016.

Brent futures were on track for their biggest daily decline since January 17, 1991 at the start of the first Gulf War.

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 19,2020

New Delhi, May 19: Spitting at workplace will be punishable with fine, the Personnel Ministry has said, citing the national directives for COVID-19 management.

In an order issued to all central government departments, it has asked their heads to ensure strict compliance of this and other directives in this regard.

This order is likely to bring about changes in and around government and private work places, where one can easily spot stains of 'pan' and 'gutka' spitted at some of the corners of walls or areas not frequented by many employees/public.

"Spitting in public and work places shall be punishable with fine, as may be prescribed in accordance with its laws, rules and regulations by the state/union territory local authority," said the national directives issued by the Home Ministry and shared by the Personnel Ministry with all central government departments.

It said wearing 'face cover' is compulsory in all public and work places.

In additional directives for the work places, the ministry said as far as possible, the practice from work from home should be followed.

"Staggering of work/business hours shall be followed in offices, work places, shops, markets and industrial and commercial establishments. Provision for thermal scanning, hand wash and sanitiser will be made at all entry and exit points and common areas," the directives said.

Frequent sanitization of the entire workplace, common facilities and all points which come into human contact e.g. door handles etc., shall be ensured, including between shifts, it said.

"All persons in charge of work places shall ensure social distancing through adequate distance between workers, adequate gaps between shifts, staggering the lunch breaks of staff, etc," the directive said.

The Centre on Monday asked 50 per cent of its junior employees, below the level of deputy secretary, to join work in office.

Till now, only 33 per cent of such employees were asked to attend office due to the novel coronavirus lockdown.

Central government employees were asked to work from home due to the lockdown that came into force from March 25.

All officers of the level of deputy secretary and above have already been asked to attend office on all working days.

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.