Previous govts hated development, says PM Modi

Thiruvananthapuram, Apr 27: BJP's Kerala state President K Surendran on Monday said it is 'highly irresponsible' of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan to not attend PM's video conference with all chief ministers on prevailing COVID-19 situation earlier today.

"The Kerala Chief Minister not attending the important conference regarding a pandemic in the country is not good for the state," Surendran said.

The BJP state President believes Vijayan has sent a wrong message by not attending the conference.

"It is the irresponsible behavior of the Chief Minister. Prime Minister Narendra Modi says that team India is fighting this pandemic together. By not attending the meeting, the Kerala CM has sent a wrong message, " he added.

Surendran said that the meeting was of high priority as PM was meeting the state CM's regarding the important decision of lockdown in the country.

"From the last meeting, many things have changed. Other chief ministers who did not get a chance to speak, participated in the meeting. But Kerala CM chose not to attend the meeting and BJP condemns it, " he said.

Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan had not participated in the PM's video conference held earlier today and instead Kerala Chief Secretary Tom Jose represented the state in the meet.

According to sources, Kerala has given its suggestions in writing.

This was the fourth such interaction of the Prime Minister with the Chief Ministers, the earlier ones had been held on March 20, April 2, and April 11.

PM Modi in the meeting said the lockdown has yielded positive results as the country has managed to save thousands of lives in the past one and a half months.

New Delhi, Feb 11: Senior Delhi Congress leader and national spokesperson of the party Sharmishtha Mukherjee alleged delay in decision making and lack of strategy and unity at the state level for the party's humiliating performance reflected in the Assembly poll results on Tuesday.

Mukherjee, president of Delhi Mahila Congress, stated that it was high time that the party takes some action. She added that she too was responsible for the Congress' poor show.

The Congress is on the verge of drawing blank again in the Assembly polls as all its candidates were way far behind their AAP and BJP opponents on all the 70 seats. In the 2015 Assembly elections too, Congress failed to win any seat.

"We r again decimated in Delhi. Enuf of introspection, time 4 action now. Inordinate delay in decision making at the top, lack of strategy & unity at state level, demotivated workers, no grassroots connect-all r factors. Being part of d system, I too take my share of responsibility (sic)," Mukherjee tweeted as the results came out.

She also accused the BJP of playing divisive politics while crediting Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal for playing "smart politics" as the results showed a clean sweep by the AAP to return to power.

"BJP playing divisive politics, Kejriwal playing ‘smart politics’ & what r we doing? Can we honestly say that we’ve done all 2 put our house in order? We r busy capturing Congress whereas other parties are capturing India. If we r 2 survive, time 2 come out of exalted echo chambers! (sic)," she said in another tweet.

The Congress contested the Delhi polls in alliance with the Rashtriya Janta Dal (RJD), fielding candidates on 66 seats and leaving four to its partner.

Jan 1: The ban on the practice of instant triple talaq, making it a penal offence and the increase in the strength of Supreme Court judges were two of the major achievements of the law ministry in 2019.

In July, Parliament gave its nod to The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2019. The new law makes talaq-e-biddat or any other similar form of talaq having the effect of instantaneous and irrevocable divorce pronounced by a Muslim husband void and illegal.

It makes it illegal to pronounce talaq three times in spoken, written or through SMS or WhatsApp or any other electronic chat in one sitting.

According to the new law, any Muslim who pronounces the illegal form of talaq upon his wife shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

During the year, four new judges were appointed to the Supreme Court in September, taking its strength to 34, the highest-ever.

However, vacancies in high courts and lower courts are on the rise and convincing state governments and the 25 high courts to come on board to create an all-India judicial service to recruit judges for the subordinate courts tops the agenda of the Law Ministry in 2020.

Besides creating a consensus on setting up the All-India Judicial Services, the ministry will also have to focus on filling up vacancies in the high court. On an average, the vacancies stood at 400 throughout this year.

With more than 5,000 positions of judicial officers in district and subordinate courts lying vacant, the Law Ministry has pitched for setting up all-India judicial services.

The sanctioned strength of the judicial officers in district and subordinate courts was 22,644. The number of judicial officers in position and vacant posts is 17,509 and 5,135, respectively.

The government has proposed that while states and high courts can recruit judicial officers, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) can hold pan-India entrance tests.

The ministry has made it clear that such services would not encroach on the powers of the states.

As of now, the selection and appointment of judges in subordinate courts is the responsibility of the high courts and state governments concerned.

The Narendra Modi government has given a fresh push to the long-pending proposal to set up the new service to have a separate cadre for the lower judiciary in the country.

But there is a divergence of opinion among state governments and respective high courts on the constitution of the All India Judicial Service (AIJS).

One of the problems cited is that since several states have used powers under Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) to declare that the local language would be used in lower courts even for writing orders, a person say selected from Tamil Nadu may find it difficult to hold proceedings in states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

The other point of opposition is that an all India service may hamper the career progression of state judicial services officers.

Another key issue the ministry has to handle in 2020 is vacancies in the 25 high courts.

Throughout 2019, on an average, the high courts faced a shortage of 400 judges.

According to Law Ministry data, as on September 1, the high courts had 414 vacant positions as compared to the sanctioned strength of 1,079 judges. The figure was 409 in August and 403 in July, as per the data.

A three-member Supreme Court collegium recommends the names of candidates for appointment as high court judges. In case of appointments to the Supreme Court, the collegium consists of five top judges of the top court.

High court collegiums shortlist candidates for their respective high courts and send the names to the law ministry.

The ministry, along with background check reports by the Intelligence Bureau, forwards it to the Supreme Court collegium for a final call.

The government has maintained that appointment of judges in the high courts is a "continuous collaborative process" between the Executive and the Judiciary, as it requires consultation and approval from various Constitutional authorities.

Vacancies keep arising on account of retirement, resignation or elevation of judges and increase in judges' strength. In June last year, the vacancy position stood at 399, while it was 396 in May.

In April, 399 posts of judges were vacant, while the figure was 394 in March. The vacancy position in February stood at 400 and in January, it was 392, according to the data collated by the Department of Justice.

Over 43 lakh cases are pending in the 25 high courts.

Another priority would be the finalisation of the memorandum of the procedure to guide the appointment and transfer of the Supreme Court and high court judges. The issue had now been pending for over two years now with the SC collegium and the government failing to reach a consensus.

Successive governments have also been working on making India a hub of international arbitration. It has taken several steps to change laws dealing with commercial disputes.