Centre asks states to seal state, district borders to stop exodus of migrants

New Delhi, Jul 13: The Land & Development Office, which comes under the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, has sent a notice to news agency PTI, demanding it to cough up more than Rs 84 crore as penalty. The notice dated July 7 says that the penalty has been imposed due to "breaches" at its office in Delhi.

The notice that sought Rs 84,48,23,281 argues that "the less will be pleased to regularise the breaches in the premises temporarily up to 14.07.2020 and withdraw the right of re-entry of the premises subject to the following conditions being fulfilled by you within 30 days from the date of issue of this letter."

The notice also stipulates that the news agency needs to give an undertaking on non-judicial stamp paper stating that it will pay the difference of "misuse/damage charges" if the land rates are revised with effect from 01.04.2016 by the government and will also remove the "breaches" by 14.07.2020 or get them regularised by paying charges.

The notice also warns that further action to execute the deed has to be subject to complete payment and putting the premise to use according to the masterplan.

The Land & Development Office so warned that an additional 10 per cent interest may need to be coughed out by PTI if it fails to furnish the concerned amount within the stipulated time period.

Additionally, if the news agency fails to comply with the terms within the said period, the concession will be withdrawn. In other words, they will have to pay the penalty up to the actual date of payment then and will also be subject to actions.

This stern notice for alleged violations by PTI comes closely on the heels of national broadcaster Prasar Bharati locking horns with PTI over its reportage that it called "anti national".

Prasar Bharti had recently sent a letter threatening to end its "relationship" with PTI after it carried an interview of Chinese Ambassador Sun Weidong, where he blamed India for the India-China violent standoff that saw 20 Indian bravehearts getting martyred.

New Delhi, Feb 17: The Supreme Court said on Monday that people have a fundamental right to protest against a law but the blocking of public roads is a matter of concern and there has to be a balancing factor.

Hearing pleas over the road blocks due to the ongoing protests at Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), a bench comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph said its concern is about what will happen if people start protesting on roads.

Democracy works on expressing views but there are lines and boundaries for it, the bench said.

It asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde and advocate Sadhana Ramachandran to talk to Shaheen Bagh protestors and persuade them to move to an alternative site where no public place is blocked.

The matter has been posted for next hearing on February 24.

People have a fundamental right to protest but the thing which is troubling us is the blocking of public roads, the bench said.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Shaheen Bagh protestors should not be given a message that every institution is on its knees trying to persuade them on this issue.

The apex court said that if nothing works, we will leave it to the authorities to deal with the situation.

Protestors have made their made their point and the protests have gone on for quite some time, it said.

Restrictions have been imposed on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch and the Okhla underpass, which were closed on December 15 last year due to the protests against CAA and Register of Citizens.

The top court had earlier said the anti-CAA protesters at Delhi's Shaheen Bagh cannot block public roads and create inconvenience for others.

The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by advocate Amit Sahni, who had approached the Delhi high court seeking directions to the Delhi Police to ensure smooth traffic flow on the Kalindi Kunj-Shaheen Bagh stretch, which was blocked by anti-CAA protesters on December 15.

While dealing with Sahni's plea, the high court had asked local authorities to deal with the situation keeping in mind law and order.

Separately, former BJP MLA Nand Kishore Garg has filed a petition in the apex court seeking directions to the authorities to remove the protestors from Shaheen Bagh.

One of the pleas has sought laying down of comprehensive and exhaustive guidelines relating to outright restrictions for holding protests or agitations leading to obstruction of public place.

In his plea, Garg has said that law enforcement machinery was being "held hostage to the whims and fancies of the protesters" who have blocked vehicular and pedestrian movement from the road connecting Delhi to Noida.

State has the duty to protect fundamental rights of citizen who were continuously being harassed by the blockage of arterial road, it said.

"It is disappointing that the state machinery is muted and a silent spectator to hooliganism and vandalism of the protesters who are threatening the existential efficacy of the democracy and the rule of law and had already taken the law and order situation in their own hand," the plea had said.

In his appeal, Sahni had sought supervision of the situation in Shaheen Bagh, where several women are sitting on protest, by a retired Supreme Court judge or a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court.

Sahni has said in his plea that protests in Shaheen Bagh has inspired similar demonstrations in other cities and to allow it to continue would set a wrong precedent.

New Delhi, Jan 18: The Supreme Court Friday refused to entertain a PIL seeking conferment of 'Bharat Ratna' on Mahatma Gandhi saying that people hold the father of the nation in “high esteem”, beyond any formal recognition.

A bench, comprising Chief Justice S A Bobde and justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant, however asked petitioner Anil Dutta Sharma to give representation to the central government in this regard.

“Mahatma Gandhi is the father of nation and people hold him in high esteem, beyond any formal recognition,” the bench said.

The issue of directing the government to award Bharat Ratna to the father of the nation was not a “justiciable issue”, it said.

The bench however said that it agreed with the sentiments of the petitioner for granting official decoration to Mahatma Gandhi.

Disposing of the petition, the top court said, “We will allow you to give a representation to the Centre in this regard.”

Sharma, in his PIL, had sought a direction to the government to give “official decoration” to Mahatma Gandhi to honour him for the contribution to the nation.