Tamil Nadu govt. urges Madras HC to exempt ‘Ungaludan Stalin' and ‘Nalam Kaakum Stalin' schemes from prohibitory order
Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan on Thursday (August 3, 2025) accepted a request made by Advocate General P.S. Raman for an early hearing of the modification petition since the Nalam Kaakum Stalin scheme was all set to be launched across the State on Saturday (August 2, 2025).
The judges said, the petition, if filed by Friday, would be taken up for hearing on Monday (August 4, 2025). Within a couple of hours, a modification plea was filed by the State government in the High Court Registry along with a detailed affidavit sworn by Public department secretary Reeta Harish Thakkar.
The affidavit said the public outreach programme titled 'Ungaludan Stalin' had been in operation for quite sometime now and even the public interest litigation petitioner C.Ve. Shanmugam, in whose case the interim order was passed, had not sought any ex-parte interim order against that scheme.
Similarly, a Government Order for the Nalam Kaakum Stalin scheme, aimed at taking healthcare to the doorsteps of the beneficiaries, was issued on June 3, 2025 itself, the Public Secretary said, and contended that only the launch was scheduled to be held on August 2, 2025 by conducting health camps in all districts.
Further, stating that the pamphlets, brochures, application forms and other related documents for the scheme had already been printed, Ms. Thakkar said, enormous efforts taken to launch the scheme on Saturday would go waste if the prohibitory interim order was made applicable to it.
'The scheme has been introduced in the name honourable Chief Minister who is a constitutional authority and it cannot be construed to have been introduced in the name of a political personality. Usage of photos of former Chief Ministers is also not expressly prohibited by the Supreme Court,' her affidavit read.
Stating that the government was prepared to contest the main PIL petition by filing a detailed counter affidavit, the secretary said: 'The present petition is being filed for the limited purpose of seeking clarification so that the order may not be applicable to the Nalam Kaakum Stalin scheme that is being launched tomorrow.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
36 minutes ago
- News18
NEET UG 2025: SC Declines To Consider Plea Alleging Errors In Question Paper
Last Updated: NEET-UG 2025: The petitioner's counsel argued that the three questions were incorrect, citing two expert opinions that supported this claim. On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to hear a plea asserting that there were 'serious errors" in three questions from the NEET-UG 2025 examination. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar advised the petitioner's counsel to approach the relevant high court. The National Testing Agency conducts the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) for admissions to MBBS, BDS, AYUSH, and other related courses in both government and private institutions nationwide. The petitioner's counsel argued that the three questions were incorrect, citing two expert opinions that supported this claim. He stated that these questions affected the petitioner's score by 13 marks. 'These (three) questions were absolutely wrong. I have taken two expert opinions and those experts also concur with my views. They have certified my views," the counsel of the petitioner argued. The bench noted that the exam had already concluded. 'You withdraw this and go to the high court," the bench suggested, emphasising not wanting to deny the petitioner any remedy. The counsel requested that the Supreme Court appoint a panel of experts to review the questions within three days and consider their opinions. After the bench expressed unwillingness to entertain the plea, the petitioner's counsel decided to withdraw it. On July 4, the Supreme Court also declined to entertain a separate petition challenging the NEET-UG 2025 results due to an alleged error in one of the questions. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
43 minutes ago
- Business Standard
HC bars Tamil Nadu govt from naming welfare schemes after living persons
The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government to refrain from naming state welfare schemes after living individuals and using political party symbols or photographs of political leaders in related publicity material. The court passed the interim order in response to a public interest litigation that questioned the naming of schemes after Chief Minister M K Stalin, according to a report from The Indian Express. Initiatives such as Ungaludan Stalin and Nalam Kaakkum Stalin were specifically cited, with the petitioner arguing that such branding misuses public resources for political promotion, the report further added. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjay V Gangapurwala and Justice P D Audikesavalu, observed that the use of names or images of living persons in government scheme promotions goes against the principles of neutrality and fairness in public administration. Government says pamphlets not official Counsel representing the state argued that the pamphlets mentioned in the petition were not official government publications. The defence also stated that the schemes themselves had public welfare objectives and that the challenge was politically motivated. Despite these claims, the court issued a directive restraining the state from continuing such promotional practices. It, however, clarified that it is not halting the implementation of welfare schemes, only regulating how they are named and advertised. Party symbols and photographs also banned The interim order extends to the use of political party logos and photographs of living leaders in any form of scheme-related communication, including banners, posters, and advertisements. The court has granted 10 days for the respondents, including the Election Commission and relevant state departments, to file their replies. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on August 13.
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
NHRC seeks action taken report on caste-derogatory village, locality names across India
In a significant move aimed at upholding constitutional values of equality and dignity, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued notices to the Department of Posts and the Principal Secretaries of Urban Development and Panchayati Raj Departments across all States and Union Territories, calling for a detailed Action Taken Report (ATR) regarding the continued use of caste-indicative and derogatory names for villages, localities, settlements, and streets across the country. The matter was brought before the NHRC through a complaint dated July 10, 2025, and considered by the Commission on July 28. The complainant had raised serious concerns about the persistence of offensive nomenclature that reflects caste-based discrimination. The Commission noted that such names violate the constitutional ideals of equality and human dignity, and contribute to the continued social stigma faced by the Scheduled Castes, even after over 7 decades of Independence. Taking cognisance under Section 12 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, a Bench presided over by NHRC Member Priyank Kanoongo directed the issuance of a formal notice. The Commission emphasised that the NHRC is empowered under the Act to investigate such matters with the authority of a civil court. The NHRC stated: 'The complainant has urged that such names be reviewed and renamed, as they are offensive and contrary to the constitutional ideals of equality and human dignity.' The Commission also cited several key legal and administrative references to support its directive. These include a 1990 circular from the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment instructing all governments to discontinue the use of the word 'Harijan', and a 1982 Ministry of Home Affairs directive banning the use of both 'Harijan' and 'Girijan.' States like Odisha, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Delhi, Punjab, and Kerala have already taken steps to enforce constitutionally-appropriate terminology. Further, the NHRC highlighted the Supreme Court's 2017 ruling in Manju Devi vs. Onkarjit Singh Ahluwalia & Others, which observed that caste-referential terms such as 'Harijan' and 'Dhobi' could constitute social insult or abuse. The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, particularly Section 3(1)(u), also criminalises the use of caste-based slurs, naming terms like 'Chamar', 'Bhangi', and 'Mehtar' as punishable offenses. The Commission also referenced a 2024 Supreme Court order in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) directing the government to consider removing casteist terms such as 'Chamar', 'Kanjar', 'Chuhra', and 'Bhangi' from official records. In its directive, the NHRC has asked all concerned authorities to compile and submit a list of towns, villages, panchayats, and other public spaces that still carry caste-indicative or derogatory names. It has also requested a report on the measures being taken to rename or remove such terms. The deadline for submission is four weeks from the date of notice. The Commission aims to address systemic discrimination embedded in geographical and administrative nomenclature, and to ensure that public spaces reflect the values enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
