Ashok Gehlot is Rajasthan CM; Sachin Pilot accepts deputy’s post

New Delhi, May 17: The HRD Ministry on Saturday postponed announcement of the exam schedule for pending class 10 and 12 board exams, saying the CBSE is still considering certain technical aspects before finalising the datesheet.

The ministry had earlier announced that it would notify the schedule at 5 pm on Saturday.

"CBSE is taking into consideration some additional technical aspects before finalizing the datesheets of the board exams of classes 10th and 12th, due to which, the datesheets will now be released by Monday i.e. 18-05-2020. Inconvenience caused is sincerely regretted (sic)," Union HRD Minister Ramesh Pokhriyal 'Nishank' tweeted.

The ministry had last week announced that the pending class 10 and 12 CBSE exams, which were postponed due to the COVID-19-induced lockdown, would be conducted from July 1 to 15.

However, the schedule as well as the modalities and guidelines have not been announced yet.

While class 12 exams will be conducted across the country, the class 10 exams are only pending in North East Delhi where they were affected due to the law and order situation.

Universities and schools across the country have been closed and exams postponed since March 16 when the Centre announced a countrywide classroom shutdown as one of the measures to contain the COVID-19 outbreak.

Later, a nationwide lockdown was announced on March 24, which has now been extended till May 17.

The board was not able to conduct class 10 and 12 exams on eight examination days due to the coronavirus outbreak.

Further, due to the law and order situation in North East Delhi, the board was not able to conduct exams on four examination days, while a very small number of students from and around this district were not able to appear in exams on six days.

The board had last month announced that it will only conduct pending exams in 29 subjects which are crucial for promotion and admission to higher educational institutions.

The modalities of assessment for the subjects for which exams are not being conducted will be announced soon by the board.

The schedule has been decided in order to ensure that the board exams are completed before competitive examinations such as engineering entrance JEE-Mains, which is scheduled from July 18-23, and medical entrance exam NEET, which is scheduled on July 26.

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has issued guidelines to universities that the new academic session for freshers will begin from September while for the existing students from August.

Mumbai, Jun 22: After downgrading India's outlook to negative from stable, Fitch Ratings on Monday revised the outlook on nine Indian banks to negative.

The outlook on the Long-Term Issuer Default Ratings (IDR) was revised to negative from stable due to the banks' high dependence on the Centre to re-capitalise them.

Accordingly, the IDR outlook of the Export-Import Bank of India, the State Bank of India, the Bank of Baroda, the Bank of Baroda (New Zealand), the Bank of India, the Canara Bank, the Punjab National Bank, ICICI Bank and Axis Bank Ltd have been downgraded to negative.

"At the same time, Fitch has affirmed IDBI Bank Limited's (IDBI) IDR while maintaining the outlook at negative," Fitch said in a statement.

The rating actions follow Fitch's revision of the outlook on the 'BBB-' rating on India to negative from stable on June 18, due to the impact of the escalating coronavirus pandemic on India's economy.

"The IDRs for all the above Indian banks are support-driven and anchored to their respective SRFs," the statement said.

"They are based on Fitch's assessment of high to moderate probability of extraordinary state support for these banks, which takes into account our assessment of the sovereign's ability and propensity to provide extraordinary support."

According to the statement, the negative outlook on India's sovereign rating reflects an increasing strain on the state's ability to provide extraordinary support, due to the sovereign's limited fiscal space and the significant deterioration in fiscal metrics due to challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic.

"The rating action does not affect the banks' Viability Rating (VR). EXIM does not have a VR as its role as a policy bank makes an assessment of its standalone credit profile less meaningful."

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.