Legal aid clinic set up in Nagaland for soldiers, ex-servicemen and their families
The scheme is a joint effort by NALSA, Kendriya Sainik Board (KSB), Rajya Sainik Boards (RSBs), Zilla Sainik Boards (ZSBs), and the Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare (DESW), under the purview of the Defence Minitry.The national-level virtual launch of the clinics across all States and Union Territories was presided over by Justice Surya Kant, Supreme Court Judge and Executive Chairman of NALSA.Joining the video conference from Srinagar were key dignitaries, including Chief Justices of various High Courts, the Minister of State for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal, Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha and Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, senior officers from the Armed and Paramilitary forces, and members of the legal fraternity.In Nagaland, the Legal Services Clinic at RSB Kohima has been established in partnership with the Nagaland State Legal Services Authority (NSLSA).It will address legal concerns specific to defence personnel, such as pension disputes, service-related benefits, family matters, property rights, and civil grievances.Speaking at the local launch, Neiko Akami, NJS, Member Secretary of NSLSA, highlighted the importance of the initiative for the welfare of ex-servicemen. Officials from the Department of Sainik Welfare, members of the legal community, and ex-servicemen were also present.The Director of RSB welcomed the move, stating that it would go a long way in supporting veterans and their families with timely and accessible legal aid.This initiative underscores the combined efforts of the legal and defence establishments in promoting legal awareness and justice for the armed forces, reaffirming the nation's commitment to those who have served.- Ends
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
For a contractual worker, 5 yrs of service till Aug 15, 2024 must to be ‘secured employee', Haryana notifies
A contractual worker in Haryana must have completed at least five years of service by August 15, 2024 and must have received wages for a minimum of 240 days in each of those years to be granted the status of a 'secured employee'. 'Even if an employee worked in both higher and lower posts within the same year, the service will be counted, provided wages were received for 240 days', the government's notification mentions. The state government has notified the Haryana Contractual Employees (Security of Service) Rules, 2025. A 'secured employee' is a contractual employee who gets job security under these rules, until retirement age of 58 years and additional benefits. The secured employee must be employed through Haryana Kaushal Rozgar Nigam or by any department, board, corporation or statutory body of the Government of Haryana under permissible criteria. Government spokesperson said that 'the services of thousands of contractual employees working in various departments, boards, corporations and other authorities across Haryana have been secured'. Chief Secretary Anurag Rastogi issued the notification detailing the conditions and criteria that a contractual worker would be required to fulfill to figure in the category of a 'secured employee'. 'Employees, who were earlier appointed to regular posts but lost their positions due to the cancellation or revision of merit lists by the Haryana Staff Selection Commission will have their prior regular service also counted toward the five-year eligibility, excluding any break period between regular and contractual service. Service rendered in different departments or government-controlled bodies will also be considered collectively', Rastogi said. 'Wherever a corresponding post is easily identifiable, the government organization will create a 'supernumerary post' (extra post) effective from August 16, 2024, for the protected employee. If a matching post is not available or the designation is different, then the concerned organization will propose the creation of such a post, including designation, pay scale, required qualifications, and job description. The government will approve this proposal within 90 days in consultation with the Finance Department, after which the protection order will be issued. If the number of protected employees in a department is high, the list will be sent to the government for adjustment in other departments as needed. The appointing authority will have the power to transfer secured employees anywhere within or outside Haryana in public interest', Rastogi explained about the criteria that shall be adopted as per the notified rules. Regarding remuneration for such employees, the notified rules mention that 'For determining remuneration, the minimum of the functional pay level approved at the time of sanctioning the supernumerary post will be increased by 5%, 10%, or 15%, as applicable. The final amount will be rounded off to the nearest hundred, ignoring fractions below 50 and rounding up if the fraction is 50 or above. Secured employees will be eligible for annual increments once a year in their functional pay level. The increment date will be either January 1 or July 1, provided the employee has completed at least six months of qualifying service before that date. The first increment will be due on July 1, 2025 upon fulfilling eligibility. These employees will also be entitled to Dearness Allowance (DA) at par with regular employees from January 1, 2025'. How their leave structure shall be followed, the notified rules mention that 'Secured employees will continue to receive casual leave and medical leave as before. Women employees will now be eligible for two casual leaves per month, up to 22 days in a year as compared to the previous 10 days. Additionally, a service book will be prepared for each protected employee by the concerned department. Until separate rules are framed, protected employees will be governed by the Haryana Civil Services (Government Employees' Conduct) Rules, 2016 and the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 2016. However, the government will have the power to relax any rule for a specific category or class of employees, citing valid reasons'. The notified rules also mention about the person who shall not be eligible under these notified rules for benefits – 'Any person who has married someone while their spouse is still alive or has remarried during the lifetime of their spouse will not be eligible for service protection under this Act. Government may grant exemption in such cases only if it is satisfied that the marriage is permissible under applicable personal law and other valid grounds exist'.
Hindustan Times
5 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Top court seeks ECI response on Bihar voter deletion allegations
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to file a reply by August 9 in response to allegations that over 6.5 million names were deleted from Bihar's draft electoral rolls without transparency during the special intensive revision (SIR) exercise. A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh issued the directive while hearing an application filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR). (ANI) A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar Singh issued the directive while hearing an application filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), which claimed that ECI failed to disclose who the deleted voters were and whether they were deceased or had migrated. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for NGO ADR, submitted that the draft list released on August 1 lacked crucial information. 'They have not specified who the 6.5 million omitted voters are. There is no clarity on whether these are deceased persons, those who have migrated, or others. Moreover, political parties were not given access to the lists at the block level,' Bhushan argued. He further submitted that in many cases, names were either included or excluded from the rolls without the recommendation of Booth Level Officers (BLOs). 'More than 75% of those included have not submitted the required 11 documents. BLOs themselves filled the forms without verifying any documents,' said the lawyer, citing instances from two constituencies where nearly 12% of entries lacked BLO endorsement. The bench observed that as per standard operating procedure, draft electoral rolls must be shared with representatives of political parties at the block level. 'This must be ensured,' remarked the court, asking ECI to clarify if and when the draft rolls were circulated to political parties prior to publication. But the ECI counsel refuted the allegations, asserting that the draft roll was indeed shared with political parties and made publicly available. 'We are obligated to make the draft roll available. We can show that it was shared with political party representatives.' To this, the bench responded: 'Then say so in your reply. Submit a list of the political parties to whom you provided the draft roll, so that the petitioner can verify this through the respective representatives.' The bench then asked ECI to file a 'comprehensive reply' by Saturday. 'We will ensure that every voter likely to be affected is informed and given an opportunity to comply with requirements. Political parties as well as the local administration must be in possession of the requisite information,' the court added. The matter is now scheduled for hearing on August 12. On July 28, the top court refused to stay the publication of the draft rolls but reminded ECI that the SIR must promote inclusion, not mass exclusion. 'Any document on this earth can be forged. Instead of en masse exclusion, you should be going for en masse inclusion,' the bench had remarked, urging ECI to treat Aadhaar and Election Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) as carrying a 'presumption of genuineness.' The court also emphasised at the time that ECI must act cautiously while dropping names from the voters' list and noted that forgery, if any, could be tackled on a case-by-case basis. The petitions by ADR and others challenge ECI's June 24 notification initiating SIR under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The petitioners argue that ECI's demand for only 11 specified documents, such as birth or matriculation certificates, passport, domicile certificate, etc, as proof of citizenship lacks statutory basis. They further claim that this restrictive documentation requirement could disenfranchise a large number of legitimate voters, especially those from marginalised communities. The petitioners have further questioned whether ECI is even empowered to conduct such a revision and verify citizenship, pointing out that this function constitutionally rests with the Union government. During an earlier hearing on July 10, a different bench of the apex court framed three key legal questions for examination: whether ECI has the authority to undertake a special revision exercise like SIR; whether the manner in which SIR is being conducted is legally valid; and whether the timing of the exercise, months ahead of the Bihar Assembly elections, is appropriate. The court had at the time noted that the issues 'go to the root of the functioning of a democratic republic' and involve the citizens' fundamental right to vote. The SIR exercise has also snowballed into a major political flashpoint. The INDIA bloc of Opposition parties has intensified protests inside Parliament, with eight parties, including Congress, Samajwadi Party, DMK, Trinamool Congress and Shiv Sena (UBT), writing to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to demand a special discussion on the issue. In their joint letter last week, the parties expressed 'deep concern' over the timing and transparency of the revision in Bihar, calling it 'unprecedented' so close to state assembly elections, and warned that ECI's plans to replicate such revisions nationwide warrant urgent scrutiny. The government, however, has accused the Opposition of attempting to 'politicise the issue of electoral reforms.'
Hindustan Times
5 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Govt says no debate on SIR due to rules
New Delhi: The government on Wednesday turned down the Opposition's demand for a discussion on the Election Commission's ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar and said in the Lok Sabha that matters pending before the judiciary cannot be discussed on the floor of the House. Opposition MPs create ruckus in Rajya Sabha during the Monsoon Session of the Parliament, in New Delhi on Wednesday. (ANI) Some Opposition leaders said that instead of SIR, they have proposed a debate on 'electoral reforms' as a way to end the deadlock in Parliament. However, government managers indicated the ruling side is unlikely to accede to any such debate. 'The government has been very open to taking up discussion on any matter... However, any discussion in the Parliament has to be in accordance with constitutional provisions and also in accordance with the rules as prescribed in the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the Lok Sabha,' parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju told the Lok Sabha. 'On the issue of intensive revision of electoral rolls in Bihar for which they (opposition members) are disturbing the House from first day of the session, we all know that the matter is under consideration of the Supreme Court and as such it is sub judice and a hence a discussion cannot be held on the subject,' he added. The minister also cited a 1988 ruling by then Lok Sabha Speaker Balram Jakhar that under the existing constitutional provisions, the House cannot comment upon the actions of the Election Commission. Jakhar, according to Rijiju, had said that he cannot break the rules by allowing a discussion on the functioning of EC. The Supreme Court is hearing a bunch of petitions challenging the ongoing SIR exercise in Bihar. On Wednesday, the top court directed EC to file a reply by August 9 in response to allegations that over 6.5 million names were deleted from Bihar's draft rolls. Rijiju underlined that the issue relates to the functioning of EC, which is an autonomous body. The minister also urged the Opposition members to participate in the debates for the passage of key legislations. 'I urge the members not to disrupt the House. There are important bills to be taken up,' he added. Meanwhile, several opposition party leaders urged Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to refer two bills — the National Sports Governance Bill, 2025 and the National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill, 2025 — to a joint committee of Parliament for further scrutiny. In a joint letter to the Speaker, the opposition leaders said there is a need for a broader consensus on the two significant bills, listed for consideration and passage in the House, considering their national importance. Proceedings in both houses have been disrupted by the Opposition, which has been creating uproar in Parliament on their demand for a discussion on SIR, which they allege is aimed at disenfranchising a large number of voters. Addressing a joint press conference of the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) bloc, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge rejected the argument that the functioning of EC cannot be discussed in Parliament as it is an independent constitutional body. Kharge cited former Rajya Sabha chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar's July 21, 2023 ruling that the House is authorised to debate anything under the sun and under the planet. 'We have been urging the speaker, chairman and the government again and again that the voting rights of people should not be stolen... That is what is happening in the SIR exercise,' the Congress chief said. Alleging that government was manipulating the electoral system according to its own convenience, Kharge said that while a huge number of voters were added in the electoral list in Maharashtra, the names of voters are being deleted in assembly poll-bound Bihar.
