Tiruppur farmers look for early disbursal of ₹ 15 lakh sanctioned as compensation for livestock killed by dogs
The State government had announced in the recent Assembly session that a farmer would be entitled to compensation of ₹6,000 for the death of a goat or sheep.
The announcement was made by Regional Joint Director of Animal Husbandry Department Pugazhendi during the monthly agriculture grievances redress meeting while responding to queries raised by farmers on the procedure to secure the relief.
The affected farmer was required to approach the Village Administrative Officer concerned, Mr. Pugazhendi said.
The relief would be distributed shortly to the affected farmers by Minister for Information and Publicity M.A. Saminathan, the farmers were told.
According to P. Velusamy, president of PAP Vellakoil Branch Water Conservation Association, the relief ought to be disbursed without delay. The farmers were already disappointed over the government's reluctance to compensate them based on market value of the livestock killed by the wandering dogs, Mr. Velusamy pointed out.
The farmers were also at a loss to understand how the compensation amount of ₹15 lakh was arrived at. 'Over the last year, at least 1,000 sheep/goat have been killed by the dogs,' Mr. Velusamy said.
As for the measures taken for controlling the population of street dogs, Mr. Pugazhendi said indiscriminate breeding could be carried out only through Animal Birth Control Programme.
Referring to the Animal Birth Control Rules (2023) formulated by the Union Government, the official said the onus was on Corporations, Municipalities and local bodies to control the street dog population. Under this programme, the dogs were required to be caught in a humane manner, sterilised, vaccinated against rabies and released in the same place from where they were caught.
The local bodies were required to undertake the task after receiving Project Recognition Certificate from Animal Welfare Board of India. There cannot be any fixed time line for controlling the population of the street dogs, Mr. Pugazhendi said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
7 hours ago
- News18
Yogi Adityanath Becomes Longest Serving UP CM, Surpasses Govind Ballabh Pant's Record
Last Updated: Breaking a 70-year-old record, UP CM Yogi Adityanath completed 8 years and 132 days in office, surpassing Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant, marking a historic milestone. It wasn't just the third Monday of the holy month of Shravan — it was a historic one too. On this day, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath scripted history by breaking a 70-year-old record to become the state's longest-serving head of government. Having completed 8 years and 132 days in office, he surpassed Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant's record of 8 years and 127 days. With this milestone, Yogi not only cements his place in the state's political history but also sets a new benchmark ahead of the crucial 2027 Assembly elections. He is also the first CM in UP's history to return to power after completing a full five-year term without a break. On March 19, 2017, Yogi Adityanath took oath as the 22nd Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, after the BJP's sweeping victory in the Assembly polls. Under his leadership, the BJP secured another emphatic mandate in the 2022 Assembly elections, making him the first Chief Minister in the state's history to return to power after completing a full five-year term without a break. A firebrand leader and the Mahant of Gorakhnath Math, Yogi began his political journey in 1998 when he became one of India's youngest MPs at just 26. Representing Gorakhpur in the Lok Sabha for five consecutive terms, he built a strong base in eastern Uttar Pradesh before transitioning to state leadership. With the next Assembly elections scheduled for 2027, Yogi now enters uncharted political terrain, seeking to consolidate his record-breaking tenure with a vision that blends infrastructure growth, law-and-order control, and cultural revivalism. Political expert Shashikant Pandey, Head of the Department of Political Science at Dr Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow, described Yogi Adityanath's tenure as 'a defining phase in Uttar Pradesh's modern political history." Pandey said, 'Yogi Adityanath's long tenure marks not only a record in numbers but also a significant shift in the state's political culture. He has successfully transformed the image of UP from being a state frequently associated with instability and lawlessness to one that speaks of firm governance and decisive leadership. His strong stance on law and order, along with the push for infrastructure and welfare schemes, has consolidated his base and created a perception of stability among the people. At the same time, Yogi has never shied away from projecting his ideological moorings, which resonate strongly with a large section of the electorate," he said. He further said that this blend of development-oriented policies with cultural nationalism has set him apart from many of his predecessors. As he crosses this milestone, his role as Chief Minister becomes even more crucial in shaping not just the state's future but also the BJP's roadmap for the 2027 elections. The real challenge now lies in maintaining this momentum and addressing rising aspirations. Who Was Govind Ballabh Pant? Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant (1887–1961) was not just the first Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh but also one of India's foremost freedom fighters and nation-builders. Born in Khoont village near Almora, he studied at Allahabad University and became a lawyer in Kashipur, where he first challenged British colonial policies. Pant played a vital role in the independence movement — representing revolutionaries in the Kakori case, participating in the Salt Satyagraha, and facing multiple imprisonments, including during the Quit India Movement. Known for his towering presence, he stood shoulder to shoulder with Gandhi, Nehru, and Patel. As Premier of the United Provinces from 1937 and later the first Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh from 1950 to 1954, Pant introduced agrarian reforms, strengthened the panchayat system, and promoted self-reliance among farmers. A key moment of his tenure came in 1949 when idols of Ram and Sita were placed inside the Babri Masjid — an event that set the stage for the decades-long Ayodhya dispute. Despite pressure from Prime Minister Nehru and Home Minister Patel to remove the idols, Pant resisted, opting for a cautious approach. In 1955, he was appointed India's Union Home Minister, where he oversaw the linguistic reorganisation of states and pushed for Hindi as an official language. For his contributions, he was awarded the Bharat Ratna in 1957. He served in office until his death in 1961. Yogi's Place in UP Politics By breaking Pant's long-standing record, Yogi Adityanath now finds himself compared to one of India's most celebrated leaders. His governance model, marked by a focus on infrastructure development, law-and-order reforms, and cultural nationalism, has reshaped the state's political discourse. He also joins a rare club of Uttar Pradesh CMs who secured consecutive mandates, alongside Sampurnanand (1957), Chandrabhanu Gupta (1962), Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna (1974), and Narayan Dutt Tiwari (1985). With the next Assembly elections due in 2027, Yogi's extended tenure provides both an opportunity and a challenge. While his record-setting leadership strengthens the BJP's claim to stability, it also sets high expectations for delivering on promises of economic growth, youth empowerment, and social harmony in the country's most populous state. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : uttar pradesh Yogi Adityanath view comments Location : Lucknow, India, India First Published: July 29, 2025, 14:59 IST News india Yogi Adityanath Becomes Longest Serving UP CM, Surpasses Govind Ballabh Pant's Record 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.
New Indian Express
10 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Ministers to stage dharna in Delhi to seek President nod for BC quota Bill
HYDERABAD: The state Cabinet, which met at the Secretariat here on Monday, decided to organise a dharna at Jantar Mantar in Delhi on August 6 demanding that the President give her assent to the two Bills approved by the Assembly for providing 42 per cent reservations for BCs in local bodies, education and employment. The Cabinet decided that all the ministers, MLAs and MPs from the state would visit Delhi from August 5 to 7 to meet not only the President of India to request approval for the Bills but also to organise protests. On August 7, almost 200 MPs belonging to the INDIA bloc will make a representation to the President. As the Parliament session is going on, the Cabinet also requested the Congress MPs to move an adjournment motion in both houses. Briefing reporters on the Cabinet decisions, BC Welfare Minister Ponnam Prabhakar, flanked by ministers Konda Surekha and Vakiti Srihari, said: 'We have decided to visit Delhi from August 5 to 7 under the leadership of Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy. We are seeking an appointment with the President to meet her along with INDIA bloc MPs.' He also appealed to all BC associations to visit Delhi on the three days. As the Telangana High Court has mandated that local body elections should be conducted by September 30, the Cabinet has decided to meet the President, he added. The minister noted: 'The Assembly has passed the two Bills and sent them to the President on March 30 after the Governor's assent. Both the Bills are pending with her for approval.'
Indian Express
10 hours ago
- Indian Express
SC to begin hearing President's reference on timeline to act on Bills from Aug 19
The Supreme Court will start hearing on August 19 the reference made to it by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143 of the Constitution, following the apex court's verdict on setting timelines for the President and governors to act on Bills passed by state Assemblies. Fixing the timeline for the hearing, a five-judge constitution bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar asked the parties to file their written submissions on or before August 12. The bench said that it will first hear the parties on the question of maintainability of the reference. Kerala and Tamil Nadu have opposed the reference and have urged the court to return the reference. 'We will hear parties on maintainability first. The ones opposing shall be heard on 19, 20, 21 and 26 August. Supporting the reference will be heard on August 20, Sept 2, 3 and 9. Time schedule will be strictly followed. Let parties complete arguments as prescribed,' the court said. In the reference, President Murmu has posed 14 questions over the top court's April 8 verdict in which it set a timeline for governors to act on pending Bills, and for the first time, prescribed that the President should decide on the Bills, reserved for consideration by the governor, within three months from the date on which such reference is received. Under Article 201 of the Constitution, no timeframe has been set for a President's decision. President Murmu sought to know whether the actions of the governors and the President are justiciable and whether such timelines can be imposed on them in the absence of any such provision in the Constitution. The reference pointed out that 'there are conflicting judgments of the Supreme Court as to whether the assent of the President of India under Article 201 of the Constitution of India is justiciable or not'. Under Article 145 (3), when the President makes a reference for the court's opinion, it is placed before a five-judge bench. In its April 8 ruling, a two-judge bench headed by Justice J B Pardiwala had said that 'in case of any delay beyond this period, appropriate reasons would have to be recorded and conveyed' to the state concerned. The ruling set aside Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi's decision to withhold assent to 10 Bills for consideration of the President in November 2023 after they had already been reconsidered by the Assembly, and said that the action was illegal and erroneous. President Murmu sought to know: 'Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India justiciable? In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed timeline and the manner of exercise of powers by the President, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of discretion by the President under Article 201 of the Constitution of India?' Article 201 prescribes the powers of the President and the procedure to be followed while assenting to Bills or withholding assent therefrom, but 'does not stipulate any time frame or procedure to be followed by the President for the exercise of constitutional options under' it. 'Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India justiciable? Is Article 361 of the Constitution of India an absolute bar to judicial review in relation to the actions of a Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India? In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit, and the manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of all powers under Article 200 of the Constitution of India by the Governor?' President Murmu pointed out that Article 200 of the Constitution, which prescribes the powers of the governor and the procedure to be followed while assenting to Bills, withholding assent to Bills and reserving a Bill for the consideration of the President, 'does not stipulate any time frame upon the Governor for the exercise of constitutional options'. President Murmu asked whether 'in light of the constitutional scheme governing the powers of the President', she 'is required to seek advice of the Supreme Court by way of a reference under Article 143 of the Constitution of India and take the opinion of the Supreme Court when the Governor reserves a Bill for the President's assent or otherwise?' 'Are the decisions of the Governor and the President under Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution of India, respectively, justiciable at a stage anterior into the law coming into force? Is it permissible for the Courts to undertake judicial adjudication over the contents of a Bill, in any manner, before it becomes law?' she further asked. The President also asked: 'Can the exercise of constitutional powers and the orders of/by the President / Governor be substituted in any manner under Article 142 of the Constitution of India?' Some of the other questions referred to the top court are: 'What are the constitutional options before a Governor when a Bill is presented to him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?; Is the Governor bound by the aid and advice tendered by the Council of Ministers while exercising all the options available with him when a Bill is presented before him under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?' The reference pointed out that the Constitution enlists numerous instances where the assent of the President has to be obtained before a legislation can take effect in a state. It said that 'the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor and the President under Article 200 and Article 201 of the Constitution of India, respectively are essentially governed by polycentric considerations, inter alia being federalism, uniformity of laws, integrity and security of the nation, doctrine of separation of powers'. The President said, 'States are frequently approaching the Supreme Court of India invoking Article 32 [and not Article 131] of the Constitution of India raising issues which by their very nature are federal issues involving interpretation of, inter alia, the Constitution of India.' The reference also said that 'the contours and scope of provisions contained in Article 142 of the Constitution of India in context of issues which are occupied by either constitutional provisions or statutory provisions also needs an opinion of the Supreme Court of India.' The President also said that 'the concept of a deemed assent of the President and the Governor is alien to the constitutional scheme and fundamentally circumscribes the power of the President and the Governor'.
