Important matters heard by Supreme Court on May 5
Important matters heard by the Supreme Court on Monday, May 5: * SC said pleas challenging Waqf (Amendment) Act's constitutional validity will now be taken up by bench headed by Chief Justice of India-designate Justice BR Gavai on May 15 as incumbent CJI will be demitting office on May 13 * SC expressed surprise that Jharkhand High Court has not pronounced verdicts in 67 criminal appeals after reserving judgment and asked all high courts to submit report in a month on cases where judgments are pending * SC sought presence of five social media influencers, including 'India's Got Latent' host Samay Raina, on plea of NGO which alleged they ridiculed persons with rare disorder Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) on their show * SC perused a forensic report on authenticity of leaked audio clips alleging role of former Manipur chief minister N Biren Singh in ethnic violence and asked state government to file fresh report pertaining to probe * SC dismissed PIL seeking safety of tourists in remote hilly areas of Jammu and Kashmir in view of recent Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 people lost their lives * SC observed it will not entertain PIL seeking contempt action against BJP MP Nishikant Dubey for his alleged derogatory remarks against top court and chief justice of India * SC said Maharashtra's director general of police will constitute SIT to probe allegations against five policemen for custodial death of Badlapur sexual assault case accused Akshay Shinde * SC sought responses from Centre and 18 states, including Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, on plea of National Legal Services Authority to release on bail group of prisoners who are terminally ill or above 70 years of age * Observing that systemic discrimination against persons with benchmark disabilities should be eliminated, SC has directed allocation of seat to a candidate with disability who cleared MBBS entrance exam in 2024 * SC asked Centre and others to respond to plea seeking horizontal reservation for transgender persons in NEET-PG 2025, which is scheduled on June 15 * SC sought responses from Centre and others on petition seeking quashing of order blocking widely viewed YouTube channel '4PM' * SC rebuked Enforcement Directorate for making allegations against accused in liquor scam case 'without any evidence' and said it has become pattern * SC rejected plea of woman, who claimed to be widow of great-grandson of Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar II, seeking possession of Red Fort on account of being legal 'heir'. PTI MNL MNL SZM SZM
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
17 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Reimburse pvt schools under RTE, HC tells TN, asks Centre to consider de-linking it from SSS
Chennai, The Madras High Court has asked the Tamil Nadu government to make reimbursement to private unaided schools under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, besides directing the Centre to consider de-linking the RTE component of Samagra Shiksha Scheme and disburse the funds accordingly. A division bench comprising Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan gave the directive on Monday, while disposing of a Public Interest Litigation filed by V Eswaran, which sought a direction to the authorities to initiate the admission process for the academic year 2024-25. During the course of hearing, Additional Advocate General J Ravindran submitted that the responsibility of reimbursement has to be shared between the Central and the State governments. Unfortunately, the State has not been paid its legitimate dues and as a result, it was not able to reimburse the school managements in time, he added. He said that due to non-release of funds by the Union government, the expenditure towards RTE reimbursement to the schools under Section 12 of the Act to the tune of ₹188.99 crore for the year 2022-23 was borne in entirety by the Government of Tamil Nadu. He sought a direction against the Union Government to pay a sum of ₹2151.59 crore being its 60 per cent share towards Samagra Shiksha Scheme as approved by Project Approval Board for the financial year 2024-25. Additional solicitor general A R L Sundaresan, while reiterating the Union Government's commitment to ensuring that every child has access to education, submitted that Samagra Shiksha Scheme was an integrated scheme that envisages education as a continuum from pre-school to class 12, and that the scheme was aligned with the provisions of NEP 2020. Since the State Government has not agreed to implement NEP 2020, there were issues regarding disbursement of funds, he added. In its order, the bench said a careful reading of the statutory provisions in the light of the various precedents leads it to the irresistible conclusion that the State Government was obliged to commence the admission process under the RTE Act well in time so that the children admitted under this quota were able to join the respective neighbourhood schools at the very commencement of the academic year. The state government has the primary responsibility under Section 7 of the Act to be responsible to provide funds for the implementation of the provisions of the Act. "Therefore, the State Government is directed to make reimbursements by adhering to the timeline laid down in the statute. The quantum of reimbursement cannot be arbitrary. It has to be as per Section 12 of the Act r/w. Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2011. The State Government has a non-derogable obligation to reimburse private unaided schools. Non-receipt of funds from the Union Government cannot be cited as a reason to wriggle out of this statutory obligation", the bench added. Having issued the aforesaid directions to the State government, the bench called upon the Central Government to discharge its obligations under the Act. It was true that implementation of the Samagra Shiksha Scheme was aligned to NEP 2020. But then, obligation under the RTE Act was independent by itself. Section 7 of the Act states that the Central Government and the State Governments have concurrent responsibility for providing funds for carrying out the provisions of the Act. Section 7 of the Act mandates that the Central Government shall provide to the State Government as grant-in-aid of revenues such percentage of expenditure referred in sub-section 2 as it may determine from time to time in consultation of the State Governments, the bench added. "Therefore, funds payable to the State Government representing the Central Government's share towards discharging the RTE obligations need not be linked to NEP 2020. Since the State Government had already filed a suit before the Supreme Court, we are not in a position to issue any binding direction in this regard." "The total sum for the financial year 2024-25 towards SSS is ₹3585.99 crore. The share of the Central Government is said to be ₹2151.59 crore. The RTE component must be less than ₹200 crores. There cannot be any difficulty in releasing the Central Government's share under this head. We, therefore, direct the Central Government to consider de-linking the RTE component of SSS and disburse the funds accordingly," the bench said.
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bengal Speaker accepts privilege motion against Suvendu Adhikari for 'defamatory' remarks against CM
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Kolkata: West Bengal Assembly Speaker Biman Banerjee on Wednesday accepted a privilege motion moved by a few Trinamool Congress TMC ) MLAs against Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari for allegedly making "defamatory and untrue" remarks against West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee outside the assembly said the motion had been forwarded to the privilege committee, which will submit its report by the next sources said the next session is likely to be held in privilege motion, submitted to the Speaker, was in response to Adhikari's alleged statements to the media claiming that the CM, during her speech on the floor of the House, had praised that Adhikari made these comments outside the House, BJP MLAs argued that the matter could not be brought under the breach of privilege motion was signed by senior TMC ministers and legislators, including Chandrima Bhattacharya, Shovandeb Chattopadhyay, Arup Biswas, Indranil Sen and Nirmal the Speaker's decision to refer the matter to the committee, opposition members staged a House witnessed chaotic scenes on Monday after the CM lauded the armed forces for their military strikes on terror hubs across the western border, but launched a blistering attack on the Union government over the Pahalgam incident, accusing the Centre of failing to provide adequate security to the nation's CM also said India had a "golden opportunity" to reclaim Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) during the military conflict, but failed to act decisively, while questioning the efficiency of BJP-led Centre 's diplomatic strategy to globally corner Pakistan.
Indian Express
27 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Digvijaya Singh's brother finally faces axe for relentless criticism of Congress high command
THE CONGRESS has finally cracked down on Lakshman Singh, a former Madhya Pradesh MLA and the brother of senior party leader Digvijaya Singh, who has been known more recently for his tirades against the party high command, including Rahul Gandhi. AICC Disciplinary Action Committee member Tariq Anwar announced Lakshman Singh's expulsion on Wednesday from the Congress's primary membership 'for a period of six years, with immediate effect, due to his anti-party activities'. While Digvijaya Singh is one of the titans of the Congress in Madhya Pradesh, Lakshman Singh has never really been at ease in the party and even left it to join the BJP for a while. The Congress took him back but, insiders say, his relentless criticism recently had made Lakshman Singh an unmanageable liability. The 70-year-old has been attacking the party leadership since he lost from the Chachoura seat in the 2023 Assembly elections. His criticism has spanned from personal attacks on Gandhi and questioning the party's electoral strategy to the Congress response to the Pahalgam terror attack and its boycott of the Ram Mandir Pran Pratishtha ceremony. He has even refused to support Digvijaya's campaign against EVMs in the state. On Wednesday, Lakshman Singh remained unreachable for comment. A senior Congress functionary said: 'When Rahul Gandhi came to Bhopal as part of the party organisation overhaul, he had spoken about senior leaders making nonsensical statements. This (Lakshman Singh's) expulsion signals to all those involved in anti-party activities that such behaviour damaging the party will no longer be tolerated.' Earlier, a show-cause notice had been served to Lakshman Singh after he commented on some remarks by Rahul Gandhi and brother-in-law Robert Vadra in context of the Pahalgam terrorist attack last month, saying: 'Gandhi and Vadra are immature. The country is suffering the consequences of their immaturity… How long will the Congress have to put up with (their) immaturity?' He added: 'Rahul Gandhi should think before he speaks, he is the LoP (Leader of the Opposition).' When the Congress decided to stay away from the Ayodhya Ram Temple inauguration last year, Lakshman Singh said: 'As far as invitation is concerned, what is the meaning of declining it? What message are we sending? When Rajiv Gandhi got it (the locks of the Babri Masjid) unlocked, who are you to decline it? If our leadership keeps such advisors, the results would be the same as they have been so far.' In December 2023, Lakshman Singh told reporters: 'Rahul Gandhi is just a party worker. He is just an MP. Apart from that, he is nothing. You people too should not highlight Rahul Gandhi so much, nor should we. No one becomes a great leader by birth, one becomes great by his/her actions. Don't consider Rahul Gandhi such a great leader, I don't.' Even earlier, during protests over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, Lakshman Singh had gone against the party line and advocated acceptance of the legislation, now that it had been passed. 'All parties have expressed their views. More comments, statements on this subject are meaningless. Let's accept it and move on.' The former Congress MLA also criticised the Congress for failure to fulfill its signature promise of farm loan waivers when in power briefly between 2019 and 2022, demanding that Gandhi apologise to the Madhya Pradesh farmers for the same. 'He should also clarify to them how long it will take for a loan waiver,' Lakshman Singh said. A seasoned politician, Lakshman Singh has served five terms as MP and three as MLA, establishing his credentials across multiple constituencies. His political journey began in 1987 from the Raghogarh municipality. Since then, he has won twice from the Raghogarh Assembly seat, before achieving a five-term victory streak from the Rajgarh Lok Sabha constituency. One of these times, in 2004, Lakshman Singh won from Rajgarh on the BJP ticket, having shifted to the party. But the Congress won back the constituency in 2009, defeating Lakshman Singh as the BJP candidate. Soon, Singh was in trouble within the BJP, and in July 2010, was expelled from the party's primary membership after publicly condemning senior BJP leader Nitin Gadkari. By January 2013, Singh was back in the Congress fold.
