In Gujarat, a new battle between governor and Narendra Modi

September 3, 2013
Ahmadabad, Sep 3: Narendra Modi and Gujarat Governor Kamla Beniwal are on collision course again after the latter returned the controversial Gujarat Lokayukta Commission Bill 2013 yesterday, despite the state assembly passing it with a clear majority earlier this year. Narendra_Modi_copy

Ms Beniwal's objection was expected since the bill proposes to give all powers to appoint the state Lokayukta or ombudsman to a committee headed by the Chief Minister, virtually eliminating the governor as well as the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court from the process.

Sources said the state government may resubmit the bill to the Governor in the assembly session that starts on September 30. The Governor will have to give her assent if the bill is sent again.

The state assembly had passed the bill after the Modi government lost a two-year long legal battle in the Supreme Court over the appointment of retired judge Justice R A Mehta as Lokayukta by the Governor. She had made that appointment without consulting the state cabinet, much to Mr Modi's chagrin.

Even after he lost his battle first in the Gujarat High Court and later in the Supreme Court, Mr Modi made no notification towards the appointment of the state Lokayukta.

Last month, Mr Mehta resigned, severely criticising the Gujarat Chief Minister.

Amid public spats, Mr Modi has repeatedly demanded that Governor Beniwal be recalled.

Gujarat has not had a functioning Lokayukta for years. The position was vacant for eight years till Justice Mehta's appointment was announced in 2011.

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
April 17,2020

New Delhi, Apr 17: With 1,076 new cases of COVID-19 in the last 24 hours and 32 deaths, India's total count of coronavirus cases has surged to 13,835, said the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Friday.

The total cases are inclusive of 1,766 cured and discharged patients, one migrated and 452 deaths. At present, there are 11,616 active COVID-19 cases in the country.

Before the lockdown, the doubling rate of COVID-19 cases was about three days, but according to the data of the past 7 days, the doubling rate of cases now stands at 6.2 days, said Lav Aggarwal, Joint Secretary, Health and Family Welfare.

"Before the lockdown, doubling rate of COVID-19 cases was about three days but according to the data of past 7 days, the doubling rate of cases now stands at 6.2 days," Aggarwal said during the daily briefing on COVID-19.

Aggarwal said that as many as 5 lakh rapid antibody testing kits are being distributed to States and Districts where a high case burden has been observed.

"A total of 1,919 dedicated COVID-19 hospitals with 1.73 lakh isolation beds, 21,800 ICU beds readied in India," he added. 

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.
News Network
June 18,2020

New Delhi, Jun 18: The Delhi High Court Thursday asked the Delhi Police to file status report on a plea by Jamia Coordination Committee member Safoora Zargar, who was arrested under the anti-terror law --UAPA -- seeking bail in a case related to communal violence in northeast Delhi during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act in February.

Zargar, M Phil student of Jamia Millia Islamia University, is more than four months pregnant.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher issued notice to the police and asked it to file a status report on the bail plea.

The high court listed the matter for further hearing on June 22.

Zargar, who was arrested by the Special Cell of Delhi Police on April 10, has challenged the June 4 order of the trial court denying her bail in the case.

The trial court, in its order, had said “when you choose to play with embers, you cannot blame the wind to have carried the spark a bit too far and spread the fire.”

It had said that during the course of investigation a larger conspiracy was discernible and if there was prima evidence of conspiracy, acts and statements made by any one of the conspirators, it is admissible against all.

The court had said that even if there was no direct act of violence attributable to the accused (Zargar), she cannot shy away from her liability under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

However, the trial court had asked the concerned jail superintendent to provide adequate medical aid and the assistance to Zargar.

The police had earlier claimed that Zargar allegedly blocked a road near Jaffrabad metro station during the anti-CAA protests and instigated people that led to the riots in the area.

It further claimed that she was allegedly part of the “premediated conspiracy” to incite communal riots in northeast Delhi in February.

Communal clashes had broken out in northeast Delhi on February 24 after violence between citizenship law supporters and protesters spiralled out of control leaving at least 53 people dead and scores injured.

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.