‘Cabinet should give nod to MBC quota within 2 meetings'
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
A day after addressing the Gurjar Mahapanchayat at Pilupura in Bharatpur, Bainsla said the samiti assured the community that the BJP govt was actively working on the proposal and the approval process was likely to begin soon. "I strongly feel that the govt already initiated steps toward approving the proposal. If not in the next cabinet meeting, which is expected in two to three weeks, I am confident it will be approved in the following one," he said, while indirectly setting the deadline for the govt.
During the mahapanchayat, the state govt presented a draft letter to the samiti, outlining key assurances. Among them was the commitment that the state cabinet would formally clear the proposal before forwarding it to the Centre for inclusion in the 9th Schedule.
He also revealed that he spoke to Kuldeep Ranka, additional chief secretary of department of social justice and empowerment, regarding inconsistencies in the implementation of the Devnarayan Yojana.
The scheme, aimed at providing financial aid and scholarships to MBC students, will now be reviewed on a monthly basis to ensure timely delivery of benefits, Bainsla said. Samiti-nominated representatives will be included in meetings to monitor progress, he said.
Bainsla also highlighted other commitments made by the govt, including expedited resolution of legal cases related to Gurjar quota agitation. He said a ministerial committee will be formed to review the MBC quota. This committee is expected to meet with the samiti within 60 days. Based on those discussions, further decisions will be made.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
16 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
SC dismisses AAP MP's plea against UP government shutting 105 primary schools
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear a petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh challenging the Uttar Pradesh government's decision to shut down 105 primary schools, Live Law reported. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih noted that the matter is pending before the Allahabad High Court. It agreed to Singh's request to direct the High Court to hear the matter expeditiously. In June, the Uttar Pradesh government had ordered the closure of the schools after finding that they had either zero or very few students enrolled. The state government had said that they would be 'paired' with other institutions. In his petition, Singh had argued that the state government's decision was 'arbitrary, unconstitutional and legally impermissible'. He added that it would negatively affect the access to education of many children in the state. Singh also said that the order violated children's right to education under Article 21A of the Constitution and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. The MP told the court that the Right to Education Rules require the establishment of a primary school within one kilometre of every habitation with at least 300 residents. The Uttar Pradesh government has defended the move as part of a policy restructuring and alignment with the National Education Policy 2020, arguing that sustaining schools with negligible student strength was inefficient, the Hindustan Times reported.
The Hindu
16 minutes ago
- The Hindu
U.P. school mergers: Supreme Court asks AAP MP to move High Court against order to merge low-enrolment schools
The Supreme Court on Monday (August 18, 2025) suggested to Aam Aadmi Party parliamentarian Sanjay Singh to approach the Allahabad High Court with his petition challenging Uttar Pradesh's 'arbitrary and unconstitutional' action of pairing and merging 105 Government primary schools through an executive action taken in June 2025. A Bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta noted that the issue was related to thousands of students and was related to an Executive action. Ideally, an Executive move ought to be challenged in the High Court concerned. The court further noted that the right to education was a statutory right under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, while also being a Constitutional entitlement under Article 21A of the Constitution. The court remarked that in cases when a right was covered by a specific statute, aggrieved persons ought to move the High Court first under Article 226 of the Constitution before agitating the issue as a Constitutional one. Mr. Singh, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, advocates Farukh Khan and Sriram Parakkat, withdrew his petition. He was given liberty to approach the High Court, which was requested to hear the case, if filed, expeditiously. The Rajya Sabha MP had said the State's order had adversely affected the educational access of numerous children. The State had, through an order of June 16, paired low-enrolment schools with proximate ones. A list issued on June 24 had identified 105 low-enrolment schools. 'As a result, several functioning schools have been closed or merged, forcing children to travel longer distances without transport, infrastructure, or prior notice. This violates Article 21A, Section 6 RTE Act, and Rule 4(1)(a) of the UP RTE Rules, since children are deprived of neighbourhood schooling… Closure or merger of schools, once established under Section 6 read with Rule 4, cannot be done by mere Executive order without legislative sanction,' the petition had pointed out.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Madras High Court takes special steps to dispose petty criminal cases pending in Tamil Nadu, Puducherry
The Madras High Court has taken up two suo motu writ petitions to identify and dispose of criminal cases pending in all courts across Tamil Nadu and Puducherry for over three years in trial/appeal/revision stage in connection with offences that are punishable up to three years. Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava has directed the Madras High Court Registry to list the suo motu writ petitions before Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy in the principal seat of the High Court in Chennai and Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan at its Madurai Bench for passing necessary judicial orders. The High Court has also decided to identify and dispose of cases booked for the charge of criminal intimidation too even if the offence was punishable for more than three years. The move comes pursuant to identical letters written by Justices Chakravarthy and Ramakrishnan to the Chief justice. Justice Chakravarthy, on Monday (August 18, 2025), requested the law officers, advocates, police as well as litigants to bring all such cases pending not only before the High Court but also before the district courts, which fall under the jurisdiction of the principal seat of the High Court in Chennai, to his notice beginning from Tuesday. He said, the High Court would first identify compoundable cases and attempt to resolve them through direct negotiations and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods. Even in non-compoundable cases, the court would suitably consider the possibility of compromise and settlement between the parties. The High Court would also suggest withdrawal of prosecution in approrpriate cases, if such course was deemed necessary and also quash cases on the ground of delay, wherever circumstances permit, in order to safeguard the right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court would further attempt to dispose of cases arising out of private complaints, such as those under the Negotiable Instruments Act of 1881, pending before trial courts. Apart from using strategies such as compounding and ADR methods, a special approach would be taken up to dispose of batch cases. 'The goal is to identify categories and recommend or apply appropriate solutions and pass orders to reduce the clogs in the wheels of the administration of criminal justice thereby ensuring proper case flow and availability of quality time for the trial of appropriate cases,' Justice Chakravarthy added.
