SC refuses to pass directions on lifting of restrictions in J&K; says govt needs time

Agencies
August 13, 2019

New Delhi, Aug 13: The situation in Jammu and Kashmir is "very sensitive" and reasonable time should be given to the government to ensure normalcy there, the apex court said on Tuesday while refusing to pass any immediate order to the Centre to lift restrictions in the region imposed after abrogation of Article 370.

The apex court also said that it is to be ensured that no life was lost there and posted the matter after two weeks, saying it will wait for normalcy to return.

A three judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra was hearing the petition filed by Congress activist Tehseen Poonawalla on the Centre's decision to impose restrictions and "other regressive measures" in Jammu and Kashmir following the revocation of the provisions of Article 370.

The Centre told the bench that they are reviewing the situation in the region on a day-to-day basis and reports come from respective district magistrates and relaxations are being ordered accordingly.

"We have to ensure that law and order situation in Jammu and Kashmir is maintained," Attorney General K K Venugopal told the bench.

He referred to the July 2016 agitation in Kashmir after encounter of terrorist Burhan Wani and said it took around three months to bring normalcy at that time.

He said that since 1990, 44,000 people have been killed by extremists and people from across the border have been guiding and giving instructions to them.

He said in the present situation, it will take few days to restore normalcy in Jammu and Kashmir.

Venugopal said that not a single death has been reported since last Monday after the restrictions were imposed.

The AG was responding to the bench which asked about the steps taken by the authorities for bringing normalcy and restoring basic facilities in the region.

During the hearing, the bench said: "The situation is such that nobody knows what exactly is happening there. Some time should be given for bringing normalcy. They are analysing the situation on a day-to-day basis.

"The government's endeavour is to restore normalcy. That is why they are reviewing the situation on a day-to-to basis. If tomorrow anything happens in Jammu and Kashmir, who will be responsible? Obviously the Centre."

The bench further said that it has to look into all the pros and cons and therefore reasonable time should be given to the government to ensure normalcy returns in the state.

It asked the petitioner's counsel senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy to give specific instances where relief is needed.

"You give us specific instances and we will give directions to them to provide relief," the bench said.

The top court asked the AG as to how much time will be needed to restore normalcy.

Venugopal replied that there is need to ensure that law and order situation is maintained and least inconvenience is caused to the general public.

He said that large number of troops and para military forces have been sent to Jammu and Kashmir.

While Guruswamy was making submissions that due to snapping of all type of communication people failed to speak on the festive occasion, the bench said, "nothing can be done overnight. There are serious issues. Normalcy would return and we expect it will come with time. What is important is it has to be ensured that no life is lost".

Venugopal said that the government is ensuring that no violence or human rights violations takes place there.

He said that during the agitation in July 2016, total of 47 persons had died but till today no one has died.

Before posting the matter after two weeks the bench said, "We are with you on the issue of right to liberty of the people. But we should have a real picture before us.

"Wait for sometime. Let us wait for normalcy to return."

The bench told further the petitioner that he will have the chance to come back after two weeks.

At the outset, Guruswamy said how can there be total prohibition on communication that even soldiers posted in the state cannot talk to their family members.

This submission invited angry reactions from the bench.

It said: "Why you are raising grievances on behalf of soldiers. Your prayer is not this. Soldiers have to maintain discipline and if they have any grievance then let them come before us. Why you are taking up the cause of soldiers."

When Guruswamy tried to make a reference of Article 370, the bench warned her saying, "Don't make any such statement on it".

She had said she was not making any comment on Article 370 but was on the issue of constitutional right of the individuals.

While she was making submissions on various violation of rights by referring to people's difficulty in even reaching to hospital and schools and police station, the bench said that in the petition no instances have been cited like that.

"Your petition is poorly drafted," the bench said, adding that it is also filed very carelessly without realizing the seriousness and importance of the matter.

Comments

Deshpremi
 - 
Tuesday, 13 Aug 2019

Very shortly rss finance group ambani n addani will release money to their sewak to purchase land at J&K.then they will put barricade like Palestine.

 

Wait see  iranian shah drama. But our mouna modified will never say any thing about these.

 

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 2,2020

New Delhi, April 2: The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has developed a bio suit to keep the medical, paramedical and other personnel engaged in combating COVID-19 safe from the deadly virus.

"Scientists at various DRDO laboratories have applied their technical know-how and expertise in textile, coating and nanotechnology to develop the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) having specific type of fabric with coating," read a statement.

The suit has been prepared with the help of the industry and subjected to rigorous testing for textile parameters as well as protection against synthetic blood. The protection against synthetic blood exceeds the criteria defined for body suits by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

"DRDO is making all efforts to ensure that these suits are produced in large numbers and serve as robust line of defence for the medics, paramedics and other personnel in the front line combating COVID-19," the statement said.

The industry is geared up for production of the suit in large quantities. Kusumgarh Industries is producing the raw material and coating material, with the complete suit being manufactured with the help of another vendor. The current production capacity is 7,000 suits per day.

Another vendor is being brought in with the experience in garment technology and efforts are on to ramp up the capacity to 15,000 suits per day.

The bio suit production in the country by DRDO industry partners and other industries are being hampered due to non-availability of seam sealing tapes, the statement said.

"The DRDO has prepared a special sealant as an alternative to seam sealing tape based on the sealant used in submarine applications.

Presently, bio suits prepared using this glue for seam sealing by an industry partner has cleared test at Southern India Textile Research Association (SITRA) Coimbatore," it said.

"This can be a game changer for the textile industry. The DRDO can mass produce this glue through industry to support the seam sealing activity by suit manufacturers," the statement 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
March 3,2020

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.

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.
International New York Times
July 7,2020

The coronavirus can stay aloft for hours in tiny droplets in stagnant air, infecting people as they inhale, mounting scientific evidence suggests.

This risk is highest in crowded indoor spaces with poor ventilation, and may help explain superspreading events reported in meatpacking plants, churches and restaurants.

It’s unclear how often the virus is spread via these tiny droplets, or aerosols, compared with larger droplets that are expelled when a sick person coughs or sneezes, or transmitted through contact with contaminated surfaces, said Linsey Marr, an aerosol expert at Virginia Tech.

Follow latest updates on the Covid-19 pandemic here

Aerosols are released even when a person without symptoms exhales, talks or sings, according to Marr and more than 200 other experts, who have outlined the evidence in an open letter to the World Health Organization.

What is clear, they said, is that people should consider minimizing time indoors with people outside their families. Schools, nursing homes and businesses should consider adding powerful new air filters and ultraviolet lights that can kill airborne viruses.

What does it mean for a virus to be airborne?

For a virus to be airborne means that it can be carried through the air in a viable form. For most pathogens, this is a yes-no scenario. HIV, too delicate to survive outside the body, is not airborne. Measles is airborne, and dangerously so: It can survive in the air for up to two hours.

For the coronavirus, the definition has been more complicated. Experts agree that the virus does not travel long distances or remain viable outdoors. But evidence suggests it can traverse the length of a room and, in one set of experimental conditions, remain viable for perhaps three hours.

How are aerosols different from droplets?

Aerosols are droplets, droplets are aerosols — they do not differ except in size. Scientists sometimes refer to droplets fewer than 5 microns in diameter as aerosols. (By comparison, a red blood cell is about 5 microns in diameter; a human hair is about 50 microns wide.)

From the start of the pandemic, the WHO and other public health organizations have focused on the virus’s ability to spread through large droplets that are expelled when a symptomatic person coughs or sneezes.

These droplets are heavy, relatively speaking, and fall quickly to the floor or onto a surface that others might touch. This is why public health agencies have recommended maintaining a distance of at least 6 feet from others, and frequent hand washing.

But some experts have said for months that infected people also are releasing aerosols when they cough and sneeze. More important, they expel aerosols even when they breathe, talk or sing, especially with some exertion.

Scientists know now that people can spread the virus even in the absence of symptoms — without coughing or sneezing — and aerosols might explain that phenomenon.

Because aerosols are smaller, they contain much less virus than droplets do. But because they are lighter, they can linger in the air for hours, especially in the absence of fresh air. In a crowded indoor space, a single infected person can release enough aerosolized virus over time to infect many people, perhaps seeding a superspreader event.

For droplets to be responsible for that kind of spread, a single person would have to be within a few feet of all the other people, or to have contaminated an object that everyone else touched. All that seems unlikely to many experts: “I have to do too many mental gymnastics to explain those other routes of transmission compared to aerosol transmission, which is much simpler,” Marr said.

Can I stop worrying about physical distancing and washing my hands?

Physical distancing is still very important. The closer you are to an infected person, the more aerosols and droplets you may be exposed to. Washing your hands often is still a good idea.

What’s new is that those two things may not be enough. “We should be placing as much emphasis on masks and ventilation as we do with hand washing,” Marr said. “As far as we can tell, this is equally important, if not more important.”

Should I begin wearing a hospital-grade mask indoors? And how long is too long to stay indoors?

Health care workers may all need to wear N95 masks, which filter out most aerosols. At the moment, they are advised to do so only when engaged in certain medical procedures that are thought to produce aerosols.

For the rest of us, cloth face masks will still greatly reduce risk, as long as most people wear them. At home, when you’re with your own family or with roommates you know to be careful, masks are still not necessary. But it is a good idea to wear them in other indoor spaces, experts said.

As for how long is safe, that is frustratingly tough to answer. A lot depends on whether the room is too crowded to allow for a safe distance from others and whether there is fresh air circulating through the room.

What does airborne transmission mean for reopening schools and colleges?

This is a matter of intense debate. Many schools are poorly ventilated and are too poorly funded to invest in new filtration systems. “There is a huge vulnerability to infection transmission via aerosols in schools,” said Don Milton, an aerosol expert at the University of Maryland.

Most children younger than 12 seem to have only mild symptoms, if any, so elementary schools may get by. “So far, we don’t have evidence that elementary schools will be a problem, but the upper grades, I think, would be more likely to be a problem,” Milton said.

College dorms and classrooms are also cause for concern.

Milton said the government should think of long-term solutions for these problems. Having public schools closed “clogs up the whole economy, and it’s a major vulnerability,” he said.

“Until we understand how this is part of our national defense, and fund it appropriately, we’re going to remain extremely vulnerable to these kinds of biological threats.”

What are some things I can do to minimize the risks?

Do as much as you can outdoors. Despite the many photos of people at beaches, even a somewhat crowded beach, especially on a breezy day, is likely to be safer than a pub or an indoor restaurant with recycled air.

But even outdoors, wear a mask if you are likely to be close to others for an extended period.

When indoors, one simple thing people can do is to “open their windows and doors whenever possible,” Marr said. You can also upgrade the filters in your home air-conditioning systems, or adjust the settings to use more outdoor air rather than recirculated air.

Public buildings and businesses may want to invest in air purifiers and ultraviolet lights that can kill the virus. Despite their reputation, elevators may not be a big risk, Milton said, compared with public bathrooms or offices with stagnant air where you may spend a long time.

If none of those things are possible, try to minimize the time you spend in an indoor space, especially without a mask. The longer you spend inside, the greater the dose of virus you might inhale.

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.