Oppn parties know they will lose elections: Javadekar

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, Mar 14: India on Friday was mulling over the option of deporting The Wall Street Journal's South Asia deputy bureau chief for misreporting Delhi riots in which over 50 people were killed last month. However, the government denied that it had made any such decision.

Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said that a complaint was registered against Eric Bellman, the WSJ South Asia deputy bureau chief based in New Delhi, by a private individual on the government's online grievance redressal platform.

"Referring the complaint to the related office is a routine matter as per standard procedure. No such decision on deportation has been taken by the Ministry of External Affairs," Kumar said.

However, government-funded Prasar Bharati News Services had earlier tweeted screenshots of the complaint which was filed by an undersecretary in the Ministry of External Affairs, Vinesh K Kalra, saying that the ministry has asked the Indian embassy in the US to "look into the request for immediate deportation of Bellman for his "anti-India behaviour".

The official had complained to the embassy about Bellman's controversial reportage on the killing of an Intelligence Bureau staffer named Ankit Sharma.

The WSJ had reported that Ankit Sharma's brother had said that he was killed by a mob belonging to a particular religious community. Ankit's brother later told Indian media that he never spoke to the WSJ reporter.

After the Prasar Bharati tweet got circulated widely on social media, the government backtracked and said that no such decision has been taken.

Pune/Mumbai, Feb 21: A BJP youth wing leader from Pune on Thursday submitted a complaint application to the police against AIMIM leader Waris Pathan for his controversial remarks made recently in Karnataka.

Pathan has claimed he has been quoted out of context.

Parismal Deshpande, a BJYM worker, submitted the written application at the Deccan Gymkhana police station, demading action against Pathan for allegedly promoting enmity between different groups and outraging religious feelings of a community.

Deshpande, in his complaint stated, that Pathan reportedly said "15 crore hai lekin 100 crore pe bhari hai' (We are 15 crore but we can dominate 100 crore).

"The statement by Pathan promotes violence and create a divide between two communities.

"Because of such statements, there are possibilities of atmosphere getting vitiated. Hence, he should be booked under IPC sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups, 295A (outraging religious feelings), and 504 (provoking breach of the peace)," Deshpande said in the complaint.

An officer from the Deccan police station confirmed receiving the application.

Meanwhile, in Mumbai, the BJP slammed Pathan.

The saffron party on Thursday tweeted @BJP4Maharashtra saying, "Waris Pathan, who are you threatening to? Shiv Sena led government may tolerate your comments; but BJP and people of Maharashtra will teach you a lesson that your hate- mongering speeches will be shut."

However, Pathan has issued a statement to the media, saying he has been quoted out of context.

"I hereby wish to state that the media reports on TV channels showing my statement made in the public meeting at Gulbarga five days back have totally quoted me out of context," Pathan claimed on late Thursday evening.

"I wish to reiterate that I can never say anything intentionally or unintentionally that hurts the sentiments of any caste, community or gender. I am a proud Indian and respects the plurality of this country," he said.