With Sudershan Reddy, INDIA bloc's googly in vice-presidential contest with NDA
The move gains added significance because of Reddy's longstanding association with TDP. During his legal career in the 1980s and 1990s, he was closely associated with Chandrababu Naidu, who was then the second-in-command of the TDP government.Reddy represented several universities and handled departmental legal matters for the TDP administration, giving him deep familiarity with Andhra politics.Chandrababu Naidu's TDP, traditionally an NDA ally, now finds itself in a difficult position. Having previously supported Radhakrishnan, the TDP faces a dilemma due to Reddy's historic association with the party.A TDP spokesperson, however, told India Today that the party remains with the NDA candidate, though sources indicate internal discussions could take place following Reddy's announcement.BRS, which has four Rajya Sabha MPs, has yet to decide its stance. Speaking to India Today, BRS MP KR Suresh said that the party has been supporting the government on issues in the interest of the nation, but a decision has not been taken on whom to support.Party President KCR will take a decision. Similarly, YSRCP has unofficially stated that they are siding with the NDA, though both parties are likely to have internal discussions with their respective chiefs before expressing their official stance post-Reddy's announcement.Meanwhile, the BJD has yet to take a position on the Vice Presidential polls, and sources confirmed that the INDIA bloc has not reached out to Naveen Patnaik's party for support.Sources argued that while the NDA's candidate, BJP veteran CP Radhakrishnan, comes from the Sangh Parivar, the Opposition is countering with "someone from the Supreme Court".They added that the candidature was crafted to satisfy every major demand within the bloc - Reddy's southern roots addressing the DMK's insistence on a nominee from the South, while his apolitical background aligns with the Trinamool Congress's push for a non-politician. With backing from the Aam Aadmi Party as well, the bloc presented him as a "full Opposition candidate".advertisementReddy's nomination comes shortly after Prime Minister Narendra Modi urged the Opposition to back NDA's pick, CP Radhakrishnan.Announcing the joint candidate, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge described the election as an "ideological battle", emphasising that all Opposition parties were united because "democratic values are under attack."Reddy, who retired from the Supreme Court in 2011 after serving as Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court and earlier as a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, brings legal credentials the Opposition believes will appeal beyond party lines. Kharge hailed him as "a champion of social and political justice".Speaking to India Today TV, Reddy said that he appeals to all parties, including the NDA, to support him, adding that as the Opposition's candidate he represented "60% of India".- EndsMust Watch
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
State will be at whim of Governors if bills held up: SC
The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed strong reservations over the Union government's interpretation of the governor's powers under the Constitution, observing that if a governor could permanently withhold assent to bills passed by an elected state legislature, it would effectively leave the state government at the 'whims and fancies' of a nominated office-bearer. Tushar Mehta insisted that the governor's power to withhold assent must be preserved in 'exceptional circumstances' The remarks came on the second day of hearings before a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai, with justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar, on a presidential reference under Article 143. The reference, made by President Droupadi Murmu in May, seeks clarity on the top court's April 8 ruling that had, for the first time, prescribed timelines for governors and the President to decide on bills pending before them. At the heart of Wednesday's arguments was the Centre's reading of the word 'withhold' in Article 200, which solicitor general Tushar Mehta argued empowers a governor to reject a bill outright, leaving it to 'fall through' without the option of being sent back to the legislature. Article 200 entails options for the governor to either grant assent to a bill passed by the state legislature, 'withhold' assent, return it for reconsideration, or reserve it for the President's approval 'This power has to be exercised sparingly and rarely, but this power is there with him,' submitted Mehta, adding that to deny such authority would reduce the governor to 'a mere post office'. The bench, however, pushed back. 'If he does not send the bill again, he can still withhold a bill for time immemorial,' the court pointed out, citing instances such as Tamil Nadu where bills re-enacted by the assembly had remained in limbo without any declaration from the governor. 'Will we not be giving total powers to the governor to sit in appeal over the decisions of an elected government? Then, a government elected with majority will be at the whims and fancy of the governor,' it added. The bench also underscored that constitutional interpretation cannot remain 'frozen in time' and must be informed by experience. 'When the laws were made originally, ideal situations were contemplated…But interpretation is a process and it takes into account how these constitutional functionaries are working today.' The bench cited the example of the anti-defection law under the 10th Schedule, where the speaker was originally seen as the best adjudicator, but decades of litigation had forced courts to re-examine that assumption. 'The validity of a constitutional vision comes by its performance and experience,'said the bench, adding that the absence of legislative impact assessments during framing had left provisions such as Article 200 vulnerable to 'complications and disputes'. Mehta, however, insisted that the governor's power to withhold assent must be preserved in 'exceptional circumstances', including on matters implicating national security or where a bill may violate fundamental rights. 'His oath of defending the Constitution will require him to exercise this power in the rarest of rare cases,' he said, while cautioning the court against turning the governor into a ceremonial figure. The bench repeatedly pressed the solicitor general on whether the power to 'withhold' could be read as an indefinite veto, pointing out that the proviso to Article 200 itself prohibits a governor from withholding assent once a bill has been re-passed by the assembly. 'If the meaning of withhold is to kill a bill, then how do we reconcile this with the proviso?' the court asked. During the daylong hearing, SG Mehta referred extensively to the Constituent Assembly debates to reinforce his point. The bench, however, posed a pointed question on whether governors in practice have lived up to the vision articulated by the framers of the Constitution, which emphasised harmony between the governor and the elected state government. 'The first part of this speech you are reading says there should be harmony between the governor and the elected government. The second part says that the provincial government would be consulted for the appointment of the governor. Is it done? Whether the expectations expressed during the Constituent Assembly debates have been really realised?' it said. At one point, the bench maintained that the governor must 'declare' or communicate his decision of withholding a bill to the state assembly, adding the central points of debate would be around the meaning of the term 'withhold' and the timeline. The presidential reference, prompted by the court's April judgment in the Tamil Nadu case, asks whether the judiciary can impose timelines on constitutional authorities like governors and the President when the Constitution itself is silent. In that ruling, a two-judge bench also fixed a three-month deadline for the president to decide on bills referred by a governor, and one month for a governor to act on re-enacted bills. It had even invoked Article 142 to deem 10 Tamil Nadu bills as assented to, after holding that the governor's prolonged inaction was 'illegal'. While making clear on Tuesday that it is only rendering an advisory opinion and not sitting in appeal over its April decision, the Constitution Bench has indicated that the meaning of 'withhold' under Article 200, and whether such discretion can amount to an absolute veto, will be central to its opinion.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Will the new Online Gaming Bill spell disaster for India's betting platforms?
The government's new online gaming bill may halt online betting. It follows a pattern of stifling industries instead of regulating them. Earlier, commodity futures and forex markets faced similar fates. The move comes before a Supreme Court ruling on gaming legality. The court will decide on skill versus chance and GST issues. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads We have done it again. All the king's men have come together to exorcise an old ghost, another spectre of 'foreign influence', that could have been tamed, harnessed and used to our advantage. Instead, we let it haunt us for years. And then in one fell swoop, we break in to cleanse and lustrate ourselves, treading the familiar path of least resistance with righteous claims to protect the poor, the Indian culture and the moral fabric of the the leitmotif of a governance style: kill it, if you cannot regulate it. The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill has again brought it to the the Bill becomes a law, it would mark the end of the road for online betting on games like poker or rummy, or wagers on various outcomes - from what could be the bitcoin price in the next 24 hours to a wicket in the next what if it is 'game over' for some betting platforms that hire cricketers and actors to lure people with little money, clueless about what they are betting on? Perhaps no big deal. What, however, is startling is the way New Delhi moved in to crush an industry after letting it grow, attract investments and hire thousands, without trying to find a way to discipline the trade. Like cryptocurrencies, GoI, while shy to regulate gaming, has been nonetheless vocal in taxing rush to squeeze a complex business without sensing its potential is not confined to gaming. Commodity futures were clamped down out of fear it would raise grain prices, for decades, India behaved like the proverbial ostrich as betting on the rupee flourished in Singapore, London and Dubai, and, more recently, a regulatory paranoia killed the forex futures market. Today, stifling taxes and reluctant bankers are pushing crypto trades overseas. We either tactlessly drove markets underground or 'exported' them to other countries. And while this went on, various stock options products were floated to entice retail investors who routinely lose real-money gaming (RMG) story could have played out differently. No gov should ignore reports of farmers ending their lives or the poor, led up the garden path with glitzy ads and deceptive promises, falling into debt traps. But these harrowing incidents could have been avoided with rules and gatekeepers: persons below a minimum income or net worth could have been shunned from the gaming wonderland, sizes of bets could have been lowered, and the number of bets a person can place in a month could have been capped by improvising the platform Nadu, Karnataka, Sikkim, Nagaland and other states with gaming frenzy could have come together with GoI, burying their differences, to decide the rules of the game and find common ground to address painful social everyone dug in their heels. Like many issues, gaming too turned political. States clung to their right as gaming - whether gambling, entertainment or digital sport - is a 'state subject'. GoI kept it in a limbo for a long time. And a fragmented, cut-throat world of gaming companies, fuelled by private equity money, turned greedy, refusing to settle for lower volumes and player India could have housed an RMG hub in the GIFT City, inviting foreigners and residents to bet. We may want to be another Singapore and not Macau, but there's no harm if we can be both, and it would be a pity if we are neither. While the Bill wants to foster 'social games' and 'e-sports', these benign pastimes may not transform into a vibrant, bankable Bill's timing was impeccable: a day before the current Parliament session ends and well before the Supreme Court verdict expected before the House resumes in winter. The apex court would rule on multiple matters: whether poker and rummy are a game of 'skill' or 'chance', the huge retroactive GST claim on the industry, and the fate of the Karnataka and Madras High Courts' decisions that thwarted the two state Bills - similar to the one drafted by GoI - to curb SC sets aside the HC rulings, it would squash any hope the industry harbours. If it upholds HC rulings, or rules out a blanket ban on RMG, it could put a question mark on the new Bill and come as a glimmer of hope to the trade. Either way, the Bill may be challenged on expected grounds: GoI's legislative competence to act on a state subject, restricting the right to trade, and arbitrarily bundling the games of skill and chance. What would the top court do? Well, that is an outcome no gamer has the skill to predict - it's an unmixed game of ambush Bill tailed by a guessing game over a future court ruling can liven up conversations and enthral viewers of the 9 o'clock news. But does it bode well for business?
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Accompanied by NDA netas & with PM as first proposer, C P Radhakrishnan files papers
Photo/ANI NEW DELHI: NDA nominee for the vice-presidential poll C P Radhakrishnan filed his nomination papers Wednesday, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi being the first proposer for his candidature. Accompanied by PM Modi, defence minister Rajnath Singh, home minister Amit Shah and other senior netas from the BJP-led alliance, Radhakrishnan filed his papers after offering floral tributes to Mahatma Gandhi. Modi, flanked by Radhakrishnan and senior NDA leaders, handed over four sets of nomination paper to Rajya Sabha secretary general P C Mody, who is the returning officer for the election. The four sets of paper have Modi, Rajnath Singh, Shah and JD(U) leader Rajiv Ranjan Singh as lead proposers. A prospective vice-presidential candidate is required to get his nomination papers subscribed to by at least 20 electors as proposers and at least 20 other electors as seconders. The NDA has ensured representation of all its constituents as proposers and seconders in the four sets of nomination paper that were filed. The returning officer examined the papers following which Radhakrishnan signed a register. Mody then handed over an acknowledgement slip of the nomination papers to the Prime Minister. Senior ministers Pralhad Joshi, Dharmendra Pradhan and other NDA netas, including TDP leader and Union minister K Ram Mohan Naidu, Shiv Sena leader Shrikant Shinde, LJSP (RV) leader Chirag Paswan escorted Radhakrishnan to the office of the returning officer in Parliament. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Skin Issues? See What An Online Dermatologist Should Cost In Tangerang AskLayers Learn More Undo Radhakrishnan's election as vice president is a certainty with NDA having the numbers in the electoral college for the vice presidential election. The electoral college comprises members of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Nominated members of the RS are also eligible to cast their votes. The effective strength of the electoral college is 781 and the majority mark is 391. The ruling NDA enjoys the support of at least 422 members, and non-INDIA bloc parties, such as YSRCP, have already announced support to Radhakrishnan.
