Power centralisation in PMO behind poor economy: Sena

Mumbai, May 17: Much on expected lines, Maharashtra, on Sunday, extended the coronavirus lockdown till May 31, in order to control the spread of the virus, under the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, the state government said in a statement.

On Sunday afternoon, Chief Secretary Ajoy Mehta, in a notification said: "It is further directed that all earlier orders shall be aligned with this order and remain in force up to and inclusive of May 31, 2020. The calibrated phase-wise relaxation or lifting of lockdown orders will be notified in due course."

"Lockdown 3.0 ends today. Lockdown 4.0 will come into effect tomorrow and will be valid till May 31. There will be some relaxations in the fourth phase," he said.

"The green and orange zones will get more relaxations, in terms of starting more services. As of now only essential services are operational, he said.

Maharashtra has recorded 30,706 COVID-19 cases of which 22,479 are active. The death toll is 1135, while 7,088 patients have been discharged after recovery.

In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 2 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1898 and the powers, conferred under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the Chairperson, State Executive Committee, issued direction to extend the lockdown till 31 May 2020 for containment of COVID-19 epidemic in the State and all Departments of Government of Maharashtra shall strictly implement the guidelines issued earlier form time to time, according to the statement.

Over the last two days,  Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray held a series of meetings with his ministerial colleagues, senior leaders including NCP supremo Sharad Pawar and top officials. 

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.

New Delhi, Feb 11 Congress's performance touched a record low in the Delhi Assembly election as the party bagged less than 5 per cent of the total votes polled and 63 of its candidates lost their deposits.

The party, which ruled Delhi for 15 years on the trot under former Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit, failed to open its account for the second consecutive assembly election in Delhi.

Only three of its candidates Arvinder Singh Lovely from Gandhi Nagar, Devender Yadav from Badli and Abhishek Dutt from Kasturba Nagar managed to save their deposits.

Security deposit of a candidate is forfeited if he/she fails to secure one-sixth of the total valid votes cast in a constituency.

Most of Congress candidates got less than 5 per cent of the total votes polled in their respective constituencies.

Delhi Congress chief Shubhash Chopra's daughter Shivani Chopra, who was the party candidate from Kalkaji, also could not save her deposit.

Former Delhi Assembly Speaker Yoganand Shastri's daughter Priyanka Singh also forfeited her deposit.

The party's campaign committee chairman Kirti Azad's wife, Poonam Azad, lost badly and stood fourth, polling only 2,604 (2.23) votes.