Dawood in Karachi under ISI cover, reveals Tunda: Reports

New Delhi, Jul 18: National carrier Air India on Friday said that it is in a ‘very challenging financial’ situation and is taking recourse to several initiatives, with a view to ensuring the continuance of its operations.

The airline, in a statement, noted that it has introduced the partially voluntary 'Leave Without Pay' (LWP) scheme on July 14.

"The scheme primarily enables employees to avail the benefits of proceeding on leave without pay on a voluntary basis. The LWP scheme has been introduced for grant of leave without pay and allowances for permanent employees for a period of six months or two years, which is extendable upto 5 years," the statement said.

"Air India had brought out similar scheme earlier... Several hundred employees have, in the past, availed of the LWP Scheme."

As per the statement, in the wake of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, there may be employees who are unable to attend their office duties in person on account of personal reasons.

"The LWP scheme enables employees to take a break from their office responsibility for a defined period of time with the approval of the management, while retaining their employment with the company," the statement said.

"They will continue to avail facilities such as passage, medical and housing at specified rates."

Accordingly, the LWP scheme provides the opportunity to employees to take up alternative employment with the approval of the management during the period of the said leave, the airline said.

"The LWP scheme is a win-win situation for both the management as well as employees as it provides flexibility to employees and simultaneously reduces the wage bill for the company," the statement said.

"It is important to note here that the Covid-19 outbreak has very seriously impacted the airline sector and currently, the airline operations of the company are a small fraction of the prior Covid level operations."

The airline said that employees are encouraged to apply for availing the benefit of the scheme, in the prescribed format, by August 15.

"The only addition in this scheme as compared to the earlier LWP scheme is that the management can pass an order requiring the employees to go on leave for a period of six months or two years (extendable upto 5 years) compulsorily taking into consideration 'Suitability, Efficiency, Competence, Quality of performance, Health, Non-availability of employee and Redundancy'," the statement said.

Furthermore, the airline said that this provision has been introduced for use, "very sparingly", with a view to ensuring that the overall efficiency of the organisation, improves and the management will ensure that this will be implemented with complete fairness and transparency as per prescribed procedure.

Consequent to the announcement of the scheme, Air India unions are discussing their strategy against the move which might involve legal recourse.

An Air India union leader on Friday told IANS: "This is going to affect the livelihood of many. Why not every employee of AI take LWP a few days every month. This way the burden can be shared."

"The motive of the top management is to save their money by snatching money from lower employees."

According to Air India PIM document, as on November 1, 2019, the airline, on a standalone basis (without subsidiaries), had around 14,000 employees, including fixed term contract staff.

The development comes as the Centre has re-initiated the airline's divestment plan with new norms.

Interestingly, this time, it has sweetened the deal by substantially reducing the debt on the airline's account books and offered a 100 per cent stake in the loss-making airline.

The last date for bid submission to acquire Air India has also been extended to August 31.

New Delhi, Mar 6: Justice S Muralidhar Thursday cleared the air over the controversy on his transfer from the Delhi High Court to Punjab and Haryana High Court, saying he had replied to Chief Justice of India S A Bobde's communication that he was fine with the proposal and had no objection to it.

The controversy erupted after the Centre issued Justice Muralidhar's transfer notification close to mid night of February 26 -- the day a bench headed by him had pulled up Delhi Police for failing to register FIRs against three BJP leaders for their alleged hate speeches which purportedly led to the recent violence in northeast Delhi.

Justice Muralidhar (58), who received a grand farewell on Thursday from a huge gathering including judges and lawyers amid big rounds of applause, said he wanted to clear the confusion on his transfer and narrated the sequence of events from the time he received CJI's communication till February 26.

The Supreme Court collegium, headed by the CJI, had in a meeting on February 12 recommended the transfer of Justice Muralidhar to Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Justice Muralidhar was number three in the Delhi High Court, his parent high court as a judge.

Explaining the transfer process, he said the 5-member collegium sends to the Centre a recommendation that a judge of a high court should be transferred to another high court. The judge concerned is not at this stage under orders of transfers. That happens only when the collegium's recommendation fructifies into a notification.

“In my case, the collegium's decision was communicated to me by the CJI on February 17 by a letter which sought my response. I acknowledged receipt of the letter, I was then asked to clarify what I meant. As I saw it, if I was to be transferred from the Delhi High Court any way, I was fine with moving to the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

“I therefore clarified to the CJI that I did not object to the proposal. An explanation for my transfer reached the press...on February 20 quoting 'sources in the Supreme Court collegium', confirming what has been indicated to me a couple of days earlier,” he said.

The CJI's letter dated February 14 was delivered to Justice Muralidhar on February 17, the day when the family's pet labrador Sakhi breathed her last.

He said February 26 was perhaps the longest working day of his life as a judge of the Delhi High Court, where he has spent 14 years on the bench.

He said it began at 12:30 am with a sitting at his residence with Justice A J Bhambhani, under the orders of Justice G S Sistani, to deal with a PIL filed by Rahul Roy seeking safe passage of ambulances carrying the injured riot victims.

“When I received a call at my residence from the lawyer for the petitioner, I first called Justice Sistani to ask what should be done, knowing that the Chief Justice (CJ) was on leave. Justice Sistani explained that he too was officially on leave the whole of February 26 and that I should take up the matter.

“This fact is stated in the order passed by the bench after the hearing. Later that day, upon urgent mentioning, as the de facto CJ's bench, Justice Talwant Singh and I took up another fresh PIL on the CJ's board seeking registration of FIRs for hate speeches. After the orders passed on that day, the above two PILs remained on the CJ's Board,” he said.

Justice Muralidhar ended the speech saying the notification which was issued close to midnight of February 26 did two things.

“First, it transferred me to Punjab and Haryana High Court. Second, it appointed me to a position from where I can never be transferred, or removed and in which I shall always be proud to remain. A 'former judge' of arguably the best high court in the country. The High Court of Delhi,” he said, following a standing ovation by all the judges and the gathering, including his family members, former judges, lawyers, court staff and media persons.

Earlier in the day, a farewell programme was also organised by the Delhi High Court Bar Association.

While addressing the gathering at the bar's function, Justice Muralidhar concluded his address saying “When justice has to triumph, it will triumph ... Be with the truth - Justice will be done.”

Justice Muralidhar's mother, wife Usha Ramanathan, former Delhi High Court chief justice A P Shah, senior advocate Shanti Bhushan and former Delhi University VC Upendra Baxi were also present at the later function that was organised by the court.

Bidding adieu to Justice Muralidhar, Delhi HC CJ D N Patel said it was an occasion which has come with a saddening effect and his absence will be felt institutionally as well as personally.

Delhi government standing counsel (criminal) Rahul Mehra termed Justice Muralidhar as a “highly intellectual, courageous, upright and incorruptible judge” and sang bengali song 'ekla chalo re' to describe him.

Mehra said he joins Delhi High Court Bar Association in “strongly condemning” Justice Muralidhar's transfer.

Jammu and Kashmir, May 5: Awarding the prestigious Pulitzer Prize to three Indian photographers, the Pulitzer Board at Columbia University claimed that it was for their work in Kashmir as "India revoked its independence".

The award to Channi Anand, Mukhtar Khan and Dar Yasin in the feature photography category for their pictures for the Associated Press was announced on Monday.

The prizes, considered the most prestigious for US journalism, are associated with the university's Graduate School of Journalism where the judging is done and is announced, although this year it was done remotely.

Besides a certificate, the prizes carry a cash award of $15,000, except the public service category for which a gold medal is awarded.

The public service prize went to The Anchorage Daily News for a series that dealt with policing in Alaska state.

In making the award to the three, the Board said on its website that it was "for striking images of life in the contested territory of Kashmir as India revoked its independence, executed through a communications blackout".

Besides making the false claim about "independence" of Kashmir being "revoked", the board that includes several leading journalists did not explain how their photographs could have reached the AP within hours of the incidents recorded "through a communication blackout".

India's Central government only revoked Article 370 of the Constitution that gave Jammu and Kashmir a special status and it was not independent.

Indian journalists were allowed to operate in Kashmir, while only non-Indian journalists were barred.

The wording of the award announcement calls into question the credibility of the Pulitzer Board that gives out what are considered prestigious journalism awards.

The portfolio of pictures by the three on the Pulitzer web site included one of a masked person attacking a police vehicle and another of masked people with variants of the Kashmir flag, besides photos of mourners and protesters.

One of the finalists for the Pulitzer Prize for explanatory journalism was a reporter of Indian descent at The Los Angeles Times, Swetha Kannan, who was nominated for her work with two colleagues on the seas rising due to climate change.