UAE: Dh5,000 fine, jail for breaking this law during Diwali

New Delhi, Mar 10: Minutes after Jyotiraditya Scindia submitted his resignation to the party membership to Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, the Congress expelled him for anti-party activities after reports emerged that he had met PM Modi and Amit Shah.

Disgruntled Congress leader Jyotiraditya Scindia met Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Tuesday amid indications that he might join hands with the BJP to topple the Madhya Pradesh government.

Sources said Scindia first met Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and then the two leaders met Modi at the prime minister's residence.

Legislators loyal to Scindia, who has been upset with the Congress leadership with his marginalisation in the affairs of the Madhya Pradesh Congress, are likely to quit the party to reduce the Kamal Nath-led government to a minority.

It is likely to be followed by the Bharatiya Janata Party staking claim to form the government in the state.

The Congress President has approved the expulsion of Jyotiraditya Scindia from the Indian National Congress with immediate effect for "anti-party activities," said KC Venugopal, General Secretary Congress.

No person is, nor will be greater than the party: Congress youth wing chief

Indian Youth Congress (IYC) chief Srinivas B V on Tuesday slammed Jyotiraditya Scindia, who has announced his resignation from the primary membership of the Congress, and thanked party chief Sonia Gandhi for expelling the former Guna MP "who was promoting anti-party activities and factionalism".

"The history of 1857 and 1967 was once again repeated," Srinivas B V said, referring to the 1857 Revolt against East India Company and the role of the Scindia royals back then as well as Vijayaraje Scindia's switch from the Congress to the Jana Sangh in 1967.

"I would like to thank Congress president Sonia Gandhiji for taking the strong steps to expel the leader who was promoting anti-party activities and factionalism," the IYC chief said.

"No person is, nor will be greater than the party," he added.

Washington, Feb 19: Sri Srinivasan, a prominent Indian-American judge, has created history by becoming the first person of South Asian descent to lead a powerful federal circuit court considered next only to the US Supreme Court.

Srinivasan, 52, became the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

An Obama appointee who has already been considered for a Supreme Court seat twice, donned the mantle of the chief judge of the DC federal court circuit on February 12.

Srinivasan succeeded Judge Merrick Garland, who has been a member of the DC Circuit since 1997 and Chief Judge since 2013. He will remain on the bench, a press release said.

Notably, Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court by the then president Barack Obama was blocked by Senate Republicans in 2016.

Srinivasan, was appointed to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in May 2013.

He was the first ever Indian-American to be appointed to the second most powerful court of the US.

Neomi Rao, nominated by President Donald Trump, is the second Indian American on this powerful judiciary bench.

History being made on the DC Court of Appeals. Congratulations, Judge Srinivasan! Senator Mark Warner said.

Congratulations to Judge Sri Srinivasan on becoming the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit! A milestone for the Indian-American/Kansan community (and yet another piece of evidence my family can use that I'm underachieving), US Federal Communications Commission Chair Ajit Pai said.

According to The Washington Post, Srinivasan spoke recently about his path to the bench at an event celebrating women in the law, a field where men still dominate leadership positions.

"Everybody doubts their belonging and worthiness in some measure. I definitely did and still do. This is just going to be a part of the thing when you're looking out in the world in which everyone isn't like you. It's natural to doubt whether you belong and whether you're worthy, he said, "but you do belong and you are worthy.

Born in Chandigarh, and raised in Lawrence, Kansas, he received a B.A. from Stanford University, a J.D. from Stanford Law School, and an M.B.A. from the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Following graduation, he served as a law clerk to Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, as a Bristow Fellow in the Office of the US Solicitor General, and as a law clerk to US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

From 2011 until his appointment to the US Court of Appeals, Judge Srinivasan served as the Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States.

He has argued 25 cases before the US Supreme Court. He has also taught appellate advocacy at Harvard Law School as well as a seminar on civil rights statutes and the Supreme Court at Georgetown University Law Center.

Mar 7: Two Malayalam news channels, Asianet News and Media One, which were banned by the information and broadcasting ministry for their coverage of the recent violence in Delhi on Friday evening, were allowed to resume telecasting on Saturday morning.

While Asianet News appeared to have begun operations around 7am on Saturday, Media One was screening content by 9.30am.

The ministry of information and broadcasting had imposed a 48-hour ban on Asianet News and Media One for their coverage of the Delhi violence for 48 hours from 7.30pm on Friday. Both Asianet News and Media One were barred under Rule 6(1 c) and Rule 6(1e) of the Cable Television Networks Act, 1994.

The ministry of information and broadcasting alleged Asianet News and Media One were "biased" and critical of the RSS and Delhi Police.

The ban on Asianet News and Media One triggered a torrent of criticism of the move. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor asked how "Malayalam channels inflame communal passions in Delhi?" and alleged some English news channels were continuing "their brazen distortions" with impunity.

In a statement issued on Friday after the ban, Media One termed the move "unfortunate and condemnable" and called it a "blatant attack against free and fair reporting". Media One called it "an order to stop free and fair journalism".