Opposition targets govt over reports about Rajnath's son

August 27, 2014

New Delhi, Aug 27: The opposition today targeted the government over media reports that claimed Home Minister Rajnath Singh's son had been ticked off by the Prime Minister for alleged misconduct, with Congress questioning what the allegations are about.

Congress General Secretary and Media Department Chairperson Ajay Maken said that the Prime Minister's Office had tweeted to say that rumours against Rajnath Singh's son are plain lies.Rajnath-Singh

"The strange thing is that when as opposition party Congress has not levelled any allegations against his (Rajnath's) son, so the country and the Congress party want to know Rajnath Singh ji,....Prime Minister you should first of all tell what are the allegations against the son, that you are denying," Maken told reporters here.

Referring to the Home Minister's statement that he would quit politics if any misconduct on his or his family's part is proved, he said the Congress party wants to know what the allegations are.

"With a lot of humility, the Congress party also wants to know from Rajnath Singh, that when it, the principal opposition party had not levelled any such allegations, then who has made these allegations," Maken said.

CPI leader D Raja said the clarification by the PMO and the Home Minister was "too late and too little" as reports have been appearing in national dailies for days together.

"Without any fire, there cannot be any smoke. It shows there are lot of things....there is internal strife....the politics is changing," he said. Raja said it is RSS which dictates what BJP should or should not do.

JD(U) leader Sharad Yadav, however, came out in support of Rajnath Singh and said the Home Minister is spotless. Similar views were expressed by NCP leader D P Tripathi.

"It is good that the PMO has clarified. I have known Rajnath Singh for so many years. He is not the kind of person who would even think of such a thing. Forget about doing it. Even his family members would never think of such a thing," said Tripathi.

Samajwadi Party (SP) also came in support of the Home Minister with party leader Gaurav Bhatia saying that "nobody has any doubts regarding the impeccable reputation Rajnath Singh has".

"But, at the same time, the clarification does not help, rather it complicates the whole issue. The clarification itself relies on rumours. So the greater question today that everyone is asking is that what were the rumours," he said.

"The people want to know about the rumours. Definitely we have seen that there has been centralisation of power in the BJP....," Bhatia said.

Meanwhile, BJP rubbished the media reports about "alleged misconduct" of Rajnath Singh's son.

"I believe the government has taken a step....The things have been put to rest absolutely....in the sense all the rumour mongers have been nailed and whoever is doing so must have got a befitting reply to this by now," party spokesperson Sambit Patra said.

He dismissed suggestions of financial irregularity on the issue. "Where was the financial irregularity? When the Prime Minister's office has denied, when Rajnath Singh has denied so the kind of speculation that was going on, the kind of rumours that were going on, they were rumours....They were not true," he said.

The PMO had earlier said, "The reports are plain lies, motivated and constitute a malicious attempt at character assassination and tarnishing the image of the Government. Those indulging in such rumour-mongering are damaging the interest of the nation. These reports are strongly denied."

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
February 2,2020

New Delhi, Feb 2: The Congress on Sunday released its manifesto for Delhi polls, promising to implement unemployment allowance of Rs 5,000-7,500 per month and cashback schemes for water and power consumers, if voted to power.

Presenting the manifesto, Delhi Congress chief Subhash Chopra said the party will provide free power up to 300 unit per month.

The manifesto also committed to spend 25 per cent budget each year on fighting pollution and improving transport facilities.

An unemployment allowance of Rs 5,000 for graduates and Rs 7,500 for post graduates per month will be provided under the Yuva Swabhiman Yojna, he said.

The Congress will launch flagship cashback schemes for power and water supply to benefit consumers saving these resources. The party, if voted to power, will open 100 Indira Canteens to provide subsidised meals at Rs 15, Chopra said.

The Congress will challenge the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in the Supreme Court and demand the Centre to withdraw the law. The party will also not implement the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the existing form of the National Population Register (NPR), if voted to power in Delhi.

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.
March 31,2020

New Delhi, Mar 31: India is likely to blacklist about 300 foreigners who came from 16 countries, including Malaysia and Thailand, on tourist visas but attended an Islamic congregation at Nizamuddin here that has become a key source for the spread of coronavirus in the country, officials said on Tuesday.

These foreigners were among around 8,000 people who attended the Tabligh-e-Jamaat at Nizamuddin Markaz facility in March, many of whom have shown symptoms of COVID-19, a Union Home Ministry officlal said.

About 30 of those who attended the Nizamuddin event in mid-March tested positive and at least three have succumbed to the infection in last few days.

"Those who came on tourist visa but attended the Nizamuddin event stands being in our blacklist as they have violated the visa conditions. Tourist visa holders can't attend religious function," a Union Home ministry official said.

If a foreigner is put in the Home ministry's blacklist, he or she can't travel to India in future.

A total of 281 foreigners were found by the police at the Nizamuddin campus in the last two days.

They include 19 people from Nepal, 20 people from Malaysia, one from Afghanistan, 33 from Myanmar, one from Algeria, one from Djibouti, 28 from Kyrgystan, 72 from Indonesia, 7 from Thailand, 34 from Sri Lanka, 19 from Bangladesh, three from England, one from Singapore, four from Fiji, one from France and one from Kuwait.

Most of these foreigners came on a tourist visa, an official 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.