‘While boasting on air strikes, PM Modi disrespected war strategy’

New Delhi, Jan 17: Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia does not have any car on his name, according to information shared in the poll affidavit filed by him for Delhi elections.

In the affidavit, it is also shown that while his self-acquired immovable property remained roughly the same as in 2015. His wife's self-acquired immovable property is worth roughly about Rs 65 lakh, as per his latest affidavit.

In the papers submitted during the nomination for 2015 Delhi polls, the senior AAP leader had declared that he owned a Maruti Swift car of make 2013.

However, in his 2020 affidavit, he has mentioned "nil" in the column for motor vehicles and other means of transport.

In the affidavit submitted on Thursday, his moveable assets were declared worth Rs 4,74,888 for 2018-19, as against Rs 4,92,624 for 2013-14.

In 2015, Sisodia had informed in his affidavit that he had bought a property in Vasundhara, Ghaziabad, worth Rs 5.07 lakh in April 2001. The approximate current market value of self-acquired property in 2015 was Rs 12 lakh.

In his current affidavit, the AAP leader has mentioned the same property. However, the approximate current market value of self-acquired property in 2020 has increased to Rs 21 lakh.

In his affidavit for the 2015 polls, Sisodia had also said that his wife had purchased a property in March 2008 costing Rs 8.70 lakh. At that time, the approximate value of her self-acquired property was Rs 20 lakh.

New Delhi, May 9: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider a plea raising the issue of mass termination and the illegal salary cut of employees in IT/ITES/BPO/KPI by their employers during the lockdown due to the spread of the coronavirus.

A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, S.K. Kaul and B.R. Gavai, taking up the matter through video conferencing, agreed to examine the issue and listed it for May 15.

The petition, argued by senior advocate Devadatt Kamat, was filed by National Information Technology Employees Sena (NITES) through advocate-on-record Amit Pai, and sought implementation of directions issued by the Centre on March 29 and similar advisories issued by several other states mandating payment of wages/salaries to the employees and also directed not to terminate them during the period of lockdown.

A directive was issued by the Union Ministry of Labour and Empowerment to all Chief Secretaries of state governments to issue advisories to public and private companies to not lay off employees or implement pay cuts during lockdown.

In the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) report published on April 19, it was noted that "several companies across the country have started to terminate its employees without any reasonable cause and have started withholding their salaries. It is submitted that in such testing times, the rights of the employees ought to be protected by necessary orders/directions to the companies through the Respondents to effectively implement the lockdown and to contain the spread of the virus", said the plea.

On March 29, the Centre issued an order directing all states and Union Territories to issue orders, requiring all the employers in the industrial sector and shops and commercial establishments to pay wages on the due date without any deduction during their closure due to the lockdown.

London, Apr 20 : Embattled liquor baron Vijay Mallya, who is wanted in India on alleged fraud and money laundering charges amounting to an estimated ₹9,000 crore, today lost a High Court appeal in UK against his extradition order to India.

A consortium of Indian public sector banks led by the State Bank of India had sought a bankruptcy order against Mallya as part of efforts to recoup around GBP 1.145 billion of unpaid loans from Mallya.

The 64-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss had appealed to the High Court against his extradition to India at a hearing in February this year.

Lord Justice Stephen Irwin and Justice Elisabeth Laing, the two-member bench at the Royal Courts of Justice in London presiding over the appeal, dismissed the appeal in a judgment handed down remotely due to the current coronavirus lockdown.

"We consider that while the scope of the prima facie case found by the SDJ [Senior District Judge] is in some respects wider than that alleged by the Respondent in India [Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED)], there is a prima facie case which, in seven important respects, coincides with the allegations in India," the judges ruled.

Earlier this month, the High Court in London had deferred hearings on a plea by the SBI-led consortium of Indian banks, seeking the indebted tycoon to be declared bankrupt to enable them recover their loan from him.

Justice Michael Briggs of the insolvency division of the High Court granted relief to Mallya, ruling that he should be given time till his petitions to the Supreme Court of India and his settlement proposal before the Karnataka High Court be determined, allowing him time to repay his debts to the banks in full.