Shamika Ravi to be appointed as member of PM economic panel

New Delhi, Jul 21: The Supreme Court has asked the Ministry of Finance to look into a plea which claimed a loss of hundreds of crore every day, as the public sector banks are not invoking personal guarantees of big corporates who have defaulted on loans.

A bench comprising Justice R. F. Nariman and Navin Sinha asked the petitioners, Saurabh Jain and Rahul Sharma, who filed the PIL, to move the Finance Ministry with a representation within two weeks. The top court observed that the issue is important and the ministry should respond after the petitioner has made the representation before it. The matter had come up for hearing on Monday.

"We are of the view that at page 115 of the Writ Petition it has been made clear that the Ministry of Finance itself has, by a Circular, directed personal guarantees issued by promoters/managerial personnel to be invoked. According to the petitioners, despite this Circular, Public Sector Undertakings continue not to invoke such guarantees resulting in huge loss not only to the public exchequer but also to the common man", said the bench in its order.

Senior advocate Manan Mishra and advocate Durga Dutt, represented the petitioners.

Mishra contended before the bench that the statistics establish the public sector banks incurred a loss of approximately Rs 1.85 lakh crore in a financial year, and the banks did not take action to invoke personal guarantees of the biggest corporate defaulters.

The bench observed that since the petitioners claim the public sector undertakings are not complying with this circular, "We think you should first go to the ministry," said the bench.

Mishra argued before the bench that the loans from a common man are recovered through a mechanism where officials go through even the minutest detail, but promoters, chairpersons and other senior level functionaries of the big corporates find it convenient to get away by defaulting on loans.

The bench told the petitioner's counsel that the Finance Ministry has already issued a notification on this matter, and the petitioners should seek response from the ministry, and then move the top court. Mishra submitted before the bench to issue a direction to the Finance Ministry to give a response on their representation.

The bench said, "We allow the petitioners, at this stage, to withdraw this Writ Petition and approach the Ministry of Finance with a representation in this behalf. The representation will be made within a period of two weeks from today. The Ministry of Finance is directed to reply to the said representation within a period of four weeks after receiving such representation. With these observations, the petition is allowed to be withdrawn to do the needful."

Mishra contended before the bench seeking liberty to come back after a reply from the Finance Ministry. Justice Nariman said this option is open for petitioners after a decision has been taken by the ministry. "We will hear you", added Justice Nariman.

An Indian national was killed and four others injured in alleged firing by Nepal police personnel along the India-Nepal border in Bihar's Sitamarhi district today.

Sources said the firing took place after a clash between the Indians and personnel of Nepal police at the Lalbandi-Janki Nagar border in Pipra Parsain panchayat under Sonebarsha police station of the district.

Jitendra Kumar, the additional director general of police (headquarters), confirmed the death and injuries. The place of firing falls under Nepal jurisdiction.

Locals said Vikesh Kumar Rai, 25, died on the spot and Umesh Ram and Uday Thakur received bullet injuries when they were working in an agricultural field. Another person, Lagan Rai, is said to have been detained by the Nepali police.

Injured persons were rushed to Sitamarhi Sadar Hospital for better treatment.

Vikesh Kumar Rai’s father, Nageshwar Rai, said that his agriculture land falls under Narayanpur in Nepal where his son was working.

On May 17, Nepal police had fired blank rounds to disperse dozens of Indians trying to cross the border. It was not clear if they were also farmers.

The district magistrate and the superintendent of police of Sitamarhi have rushed to the spot.

Nepal shares a 1,850-kilometre (1,150-mile) open border with India and people travel across it for work and to visit family. It had closed its international borders on March 22 amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Lucknow, May 25: Migrant workers who wish to return to their places of work after the lockdown is lifted, may no longer find the going easy now.

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has said that his government will lay down stringent conditions for ensuring social security of workers from the state who are hired by other states.

"Other states will also need to seek permission from his government before engaging workers from UP," he said while addressing a webinar on Sunday.

The Chief Minister stated, "If any state wants manpower, the state government will have to guarantee social security and insurance of the workers. Without our permission they will not be able to take our people," he said.

He said all migrant workers who have returned to the state were being registered and their skills were being mapped by the administration. Any state or entity interested in hiring them will need to take care of their social, legal and monetary rights.

Speaking about the challenges his administration had faced during this crisis, the Chief Minister said, "When I talk of Uttar Pradesh, then it is natural to say that it is the state with the highest population. We have faced several challenges during the lockdown. At the beginning, migrant workers and labourers started coming to the state. We deployed 16,000 buses and within 24 hours, they were brought back to their home districts and arrangements were made to screen them."

Yogi Adityanath took a dig at the opposition leaders for the migrant crisis. "During the lockdown, if those who now raise slogans for the poor had honestly cared about workers, then migration could have been stopped. This did not happen. No facilities were given. At several places, electricity connections were cut, so people had to migrate." he said.

Legal experts, meanwhile said that requiring government permission for employing people could face a legal challenge as the Constitution guarantees the freedom of movement and residence and employment of workers.

"Article 19 (1)(D) guarantees freedom to move freely, and 19(1)(e) the freedom to settled in any part of the countryso the need for permission can be legally challenged," said a senior lawyer.