People getting married shows economy is fine: Union minister

New Delhi, Apr 25: Neighbourhood and standalone shops, including those selling garments, mobile phones, hardware and stationery items have been allowed to open but those located in market places, malls and COVID-19 hotspots and containment zones, will continue to remain shut till May 3.

In rural areas, all shops, except those in single and multi-brand shopping malls, are allowed to open.

However, a Home Ministry official said the final decision of whether to allow the additional shops to open or not will be taken by the state governments and Union Territory administrations depending on their respective COVID-19 situation.
 
While allowing opening of more shops, a move seen as a relief to people who have been under lockdown since March 24, the government order issued on Friday night said the shops will be functioning with 50 per cent of workforce and after adhering strictly to precautions which include social distancing and wearing of masks.

The Union Home Ministry also said malls, liquor and cigarette shops, sale of non-essential items through e-commerce platforms continue to remain shut.

Restaurants, hair salons and barber shops will not be allowed to open as these render services and do not fall under the shop category.

Amending its April 15 order, Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla said in the Friday night order that "all shops, including neighbourhood shops and standalone shops, shops in residential complexes, within the limits of municipal corporations and municipalities, registered under the the Shops and Establishment Act of the respective State and UT" will be allowed to open during the lockdown.

The ministry also said shops located in registered markets located outside the municipal corporations and municipalities can open after following the drill of social distancing and wearing of masks but with 50 per cent of strength.

However, single and multi-brands shall continue to remain closed in these areas also.

"All shops registered under the the Shops and Establishment Act of the respective State/UT, including shops in residential complexes and market complexes, except shops in multi-brand and single brand malls, outside the limits of municipal corporations and municipalities, with 50 per cent strength of workers with wearing of masks and social distancing being mandatory" will be allowed to function, the order said.

In a statement on Saturday, the Home Ministry said the order implies that in rural areas, all shops, except those in shopping malls are allowed to open.

In urban areas, all standalone shops, neighbourhood shops and shops in residential complexes are allowed to open.

Shops in markets and market complexes and shopping malls are not allowed to open.

"It is clarified that sale by e-commerce companies will continue to be permitted for essential goods only," the order said and also added that sale of liquor and other items continues to be prohibited as specified in the national directives for COVID-19 management.

The ministry said that liquor shops were given licence under the Excise Act of the states and the establishments thrown open from Saturday were covered under the Shops and Establishment Act of the states.

Sale of cigarettes, gutka are continue to be prohibited during the lockdown.

"As specified in the consolidated revised guidelines, these shops will not be permitted to open in areas, whether rural or urban, which are declared as containment zones by respective States and Union Territories," the statement said.

The lockdown was first announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on March 24 in a bid to combat the coronavirus pandemic. It was further extended till May 3.

New Delhi, Feb 29: Amid the raging communal violence in the entire north-east Delhi earlier this week, there were people who were trying to save persons and families from the "other community" from the fury of the mobs of their own community.

Naeem Ali Pradhan, 34, from Shiv Vihar, helped at least 7-8 Hindus on the night of February 24 -- when the violence was at its peak-- escape to safer locations. Shiv Vihar is one of the worst affected areas in the violence.

According to Naeem Ali, that night mobs attacked dozens of shops on the road and later tried to enter inside the residential areas.

Suddenly, he spotted a group of youth who were looking hassled and frantically asking for directions.

"I saw them. Thye were Hindus who were trying to escape a mob looking to target them. They had lost their way inside the streets of our colony. I along with other Muslim men escorted them to the nearby Hindu locality," Naeem, who is also a member of the Aman Committee constituted by the Delhi police, told ANI.

"Several shops which were on the roads including some showrooms were attacked by a group. These Hindus were worried as a mob which was on the main road was attacking people. They asked me the address of a colony as they were unable to find their way," Naeem said.

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.