Cabinet clears health insurance for three lakh contract, outsourced employees
The employees have to contribute ₹100 a year as health insurance premium while the government bears the rest of the cost, according to Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H.K. Patil.
Suvarna Arogya Suraksha Trust was established in 2009 for providing cashless health insurance.
Mobile health clinics
The Cabinet approved a ₹17.97-crore proposal for providing mobile health clinics in remote areas of the State. The clinics would enable residents of isolated or remote areas to access primary healthcare services.
A proposal to declare Mugli-Apsarakonda Marine Sanctuary as Karnataka's first marine sanctuary was also cleared. The sanctuary is spread over 5,959 hectares, near Honnavar in Uttara Kannada district. The proposal was approved by the Karnataka State Board for Wildlife a few years ago.
The Cabinet cleared the revised expenditure of ₹742 crore for the Anubhava Mantapa at Basavakalyan in Bidar district. Earlier, the project cost was ₹612 crore and the hike in GST from 12% to 18% on materials is said to be the reason for the cost escalation.
Processing unit
A ₹35.07-crore proposal of the Horticulture Department to set up a processing unit for mango and other horticultural crops on a PPP model on 28.3 acres at Yalavatti village in Hangal taluk of Haveri district was cleared by the Cabinet.
A proposal to rename the Basapura village in Hangal taluk of Haveri district was approved, and the village was renamed as Gerugudda Basapura, Mr. Patil added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
Judge's vaccine exemption ruling sparks education crisis in West Virginia schools
A West Virginia judge's ruling on Thursday permitting three unvaccinated children to attend public school this fall has sparked intense debate over the intersection of religious freedom, student safety, and access to education. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Issued just weeks before the new school year begins, the injunction marks a significant moment in a growing national struggle over vaccine mandates in classrooms. The legal victory, though limited in scope, comes amid a high-stakes confrontation between Republican Governor Patrick Morrisey and the West Virginia Board of Education, potentially setting the tone for how vaccine-related disputes will influence education policy and student welfare. Religious exemptions vs. State Education law Raleigh County Circuit Judge Michael Froble granted a preliminary injunction in favour of three families who filed suit on June 24, asserting that their children should be allowed to attend school without required vaccinations on religious grounds. The order currently applies only to those three children, but its symbolic weight is far greater. Governor Morrisey, who took office in January, had issued an executive order allowing religious exemptions to long-standing school vaccine mandates. However, the West Virginia Board of Education voted to ignore the order, asserting that it violates existing state law, which prohibits religious exemptions for school-entry vaccinations. Calling the court decision a major step forward, Morrisey said as reported by the Associated Press: 'Today's ruling is another legal victory in the fight for religious freedom. No family should be forced to choose between their faith and their children's education, which is exactly what the unelected bureaucrats on the State Board of Education are attempting to force West Virginians to do. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Education infrastructure under pressure School administrators across the state now face growing uncertainty over how to prepare for a safe reopening. Public school vaccine mandates, long credited with shielding students from preventable illnesses, are deeply embedded in the state's education infrastructure. West Virginia requires immunizations against diseases such as measles, hepatitis B, polio, and chickenpox for school enrollment. Medical professionals warn that relaxing these rules may undermine classroom safety and disrupt student learning. Vaccination mandates for public schools are seen as a way to prevent the spread of once-common childhood diseases, according to national public health guidelines. Already, the United States is experiencing its worst year for measles in more than 30 years. Educators worry that rising vaccine hesitancy may not only spark outbreaks, but also cause spikes in absenteeism, learning loss, and increased pressure on teachers already coping with post-pandemic academic gaps. Colleges and careers could see Ripple effects High school students granted religious exemptions may also face hurdles in their higher education journey. Many colleges and universities require proof of immunisation for enrollment, on-campus housing, and participation in exchange programmes. A legal shift at the K-12 level could therefore introduce friction in the college application process, particularly for students eyeing out-of-state or international opportunities. Moreover, for students pursuing careers in healthcare, teaching, or early childhood education, fields where vaccinations are often non-negotiable, the decision could alter their eligibility and employability. Faith vs. medical consensus The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include Miranda Guzman, a parent who identifies as Christian. According to the complaint, Guzman believes that altering her child's immune system via vaccines would 'demonstrate a lack of faith in God' and 'disobey the Holy Spirit's leading.' Two additional parents joined the suit after it was filed. Notably, the lawsuit does not specify any religious denomination, and the American Bar Association states that most religious denominations and groups support medical vaccinations. While the ruling supports the plaintiffs' right to an education aligned with their faith, critics argue that it sets a dangerous precedent by elevating personal belief above scientific consensus and community health. Board pushback and legal uncertainty The state Board of Education has expressed dissatisfaction with the outcome. In a statement, it said it was 'disappointed by the ruling' and that its members 'will decide next steps in the near future.' Education officials remain firm that only the Legislature, not the Governor, can rewrite public health policy tied to school attendance. Meanwhile, a separate lawsuit against Governor Morrisey's executive order was dismissed this week on procedural grounds due to a lack of a 30-day notice. However, the court has permitted it to be refiled, ensuring that the legal tug-of-war is far from over. Lawmakers in West Virginia also failed to pass a bill during their last session that would have legalized religious exemptions for school vaccine mandates, another sign of legislative gridlock. A fragile balance between belief and learning As classrooms prepare to welcome students back, the state must now grapple with a pivotal question: Can West Virginia safeguard both religious freedom and the public right to a safe education? Though this injunction currently affects only a few students, it opens the door to wider challenges—ones that could disrupt the very structure of school entry, student health policies, and post-secondary planning.
Indian Express
3 days ago
- Indian Express
Gujarat HC upholds state government's move to levy VAT on sale of medicines, implants by private hospitals to indoor patients
The Gujarat High Court on Friday upheld the state government's decision to levy VAT on the sale of medicines, implants, prosthetics, stents, and other consumables supplied by private hospitals to their indoor patients during the course of treatment. The HC was hearing a 2011 petition moved by private hospitals in the state challenging the notices issued and demand by the state government to levy VAT on certain hospitals. Leading hospitals, including Sterling, Bankers Cardiology, Shalby, CIMS, and Wockhardt, had challenged the tax demands issued under the Gujarat Value Added Tax (VAT) Act, 2003, contending that healthcare services rendered to indoor patients constitute a composite medical service and cannot be classified as a 'sale' for the purpose of taxation. Countering the petitions on behalf of the State, Advocate General Kamal Trivedi, assisted by Assistant Government Pleader Vinay Bairagra, argued that following the 46th Amendment to the Constitution, health care services provided by private hospitals fall within the ambit of 'works contract' as defined under Article 366 (29A) of the Constitution read with Section 2(23) of the Gujarat VAT Act. The State contended that tax was being levied not on the entire medical service, but only on the transfer of goods involved during the course of treatment. 'A Division Bench comprising Justice B D Karia and Justice D N Ray accepted the State's contentions, ruling that after the 46th Constitutional Amendment, all composite contracts, including those involving healthcare services to indoor patients, can be treated as 'works contracts'. Consequently, the tax component on the transfer of goods embedded in such services is justified and valid,' Advocate General Trivedi said. The judgment clears the way for the VAT department to recover dues from private hospitals on the sale value of consumables and medical goods like medicaments, prosthetics, implants, stents, etc. provided during treatment to their patients. The ruling is seen as a landmark clarification on the taxability of medical services under the VAT regime. While dictating the order orally, the court observed, 'Rendering services together with supply of implants, stents, medicine etc, for treatment of indoor patients cannot be given a restricted meaning by excluding the same from 'works contract'. On the basis that the 'works contract' as a concept was originally confined to contracts involving properties alone…' The court said, 'However, after the 46th amendment to the Constitution, definition of works contract was widened. It is broad based, taking within its fold every possible and conceivable contract involving transfer of property, providing service. Therefore… It can include hospitals, health and medical services involving composite contracts with the provision of service also including supply of goods with medical service. And the definition takes within its fold such services also and therefore, the respondent state was justified in proposing demand for tax…'
The Hindu
4 days ago
- The Hindu
Ayushman Bharat Arogya Karnataka: Health Dept. considering relaxing referral system for certain procedures
Realising that the existing online referral system (ORS) has significantly complicated service delivery under the Ayushman Bharat Arogya Karnataka (AB-ArK) scheme, the State Health Department is examining a proposal to relax referral requirements for certain super-speciality procedures in the first phase. Apart from this, the department is also considering doing away with referrals for all simple secondary procedures in BBMP areas. This is because the existing government hospital beds in Bengaluru are not proportionate to the population and the referral system is causing severe hardship to needy patients. The proposal has been drafted following a detailed review of the existing online referral system through field visits and interactions with various stakeholders, including health service providers, beneficiaries at private medical colleges and empanelled private hospitals, as well as field staff from the Suvarna Arogya Suraksha Trust (SAST), the agency implementing the health scheme. The (AB-ArK) scheme covers 1,650 procedures — 294 simple secondary, 251 complex secondary, 934 tertiary care procedures and 171 emergency procedures. While the simple secondary procedures are completely handled at the government hospital level, for all other procedures, patients need to be referred by a government hospital to a higher facility (including empanelled private hospitals) if the former is not equipped to treat the illness. The scheme offers cashless treatment up to ₹5 lakh a year per family. Around 3.42 lakh patients have been referred online since June 2022, when the ORS was introduced in Karnataka, till June 2025. The referral policy, which has been in place since the inception of the scheme and was done manually prior to June 2022, has undergone multiple changes. Initially, the scheme offered free services at government institutions and package based services at the private hospital. However, it was later modified to include reimbursement packages for government hospitals for various procedures — 50% (secondary), 75% (tertiary), and 100% (cardiac) of the total package cost. Government institutions currently receive approximately ₹1,000 crore annually from the scheme in the form of claim reimbursements. Issues with referral system Harsh Gupta, principal secretary (Health and Family Welfare), told The Hindu that interactions with various stakeholders had revealed that the existing referral system has significantly complicated service delivery under the scheme, particularly for under-privileged sections of society. 'It adds another layer of complexity during emergencies. Patients are forced to navigate the process just to access services at empanelled institutions,' he said. 'The proposal is to relax the referral requirements for certain procedures that would anyways have been referred by a government hospital to a private empanelled facility. Procedures such as cardiology, cardiothoracic surgery, cardiovascular surgery, urology, medical oncology, surgical oncology, and radiation oncology can be considered in the first phase. The applicability of the referral policy should depend on the accessibility, availability of services, and capacity of the healthcare system, as well as the patient load,' he said. In reputed medical college hospitals Besides, referral relaxation is also under consideration for neonatal codes related to babies born in non-empanelled hospitals. This is likely to be permitted exclusively for medical colleges with adequate infrastructure. 'On a pilot basis, we have relaxed referral requirements for a sub-set of complex secondary and tertiary procedures at Sathya Sai Memorial Hospital in Chikkaballapur district and BLDE Medical College Hospital in Vijayapura for the last six months. Now, we want to try it out in other reputed medical colleges, selected on some objective criteria such as those preferred by top rankers in NEET exam. We can list out top 50% of such colleges either on this criteria or on some other reasonable criteria. Thereafter, these selected private medical colleges can be exempted from the requirement of reference for tertiary procedures,' he explained.
