Tribals protest against Siramtoli flyover ramp
1
2
Ranchi: Several tribal organisations under the banner of Adivasi Bachao Morcha staged a one-day protest outside Raj Bhavan on Tuesday, demanding the removal of the ramp near the Siramtoli Sarna site and the full implementation of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA) in Jharkhand.
The demonstrators alleged that the ramp near the central Sarna religious site at Siramtoli obstructs large religious gatherings, especially during annual processions, and must be removed immediately. The protest saw participation from former minister Dev Kumar Dhan and Geetashree Oraon, among others.
The protestors also accused the state govt of failing to protect tribal constitutional rights despite 25 years of Jharkhand's formation.
"From land grabbing to lack of employment, the issues of tribal communities remain unaddressed. The govt has shown no sensitivity toward PESA, Sarna Code, and tribal land rights," said Prem Shahi Munda, convenor of Adivasi Bachao Morcha.
Key demands included declaration of sites like Marang Buru, Luguburu, and Mudhar Pahad as tribal religious places, a separate religious code in the census, and withdrawal of policies promoting alcohol in tribal-dominated rural areas.
Hashtags
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
Nearly half of Haryana's information officers fail to pay RTI penalties: Data
Over the past 18 years, 48.6% of information officers in Haryana have failed to deposit fines imposed on them by the Haryana State Information Commission. This data, procured under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, reveals that these penalties were levied on officers for failing to provide complete information within the stipulated time. Responding to a query by Haryana Soochna Adhikar Manch convener Subhash, the commission disclosed that 4,043 information officials had been fined in this period. The total penalty imposed on them amounts to Rs. 5.9 crore, of which Rs. 2.84 crore has been recovered. However, 1,965 officials are yet to pay their fines, leaving over Rs. 3 crore unpaid. RTI activist Subhash, who founded the Haryana Soochna Adhikar Manch in 2007, has emphasised the need for strict action against officials who withhold information and later fail to deposit fines. Another activist, P P Kapoor, previously approached the Lokayukta demanding action against defaulting officers. He also urged the anti-corruption ombudsman to direct the government to recover fines with interest. Kapoor told The Indian Express that hearings on the matter were nearing completion, and he expected a ruling soon. He has suggested that retirement benefits should be withheld from officers who fail to clear penalties before superannuation. Former State Information Commissioner Hemant Atri has consistently pushed for a mechanism to ensure compliance with commission orders. He advocates for strict action against State Public Information Officers (SPIOs) who ignore hearings and fail to implement directives. Atri explained that, during his tenure, he held First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) accountable for enforcing his orders. He emphasised that drawing and disbursing officers (DDOs) and FAAs should be responsible for ensuring penalty payments, warning that failure to comply could result in action under Section 20(2) of the RTI Act, 2005. A senior Haryana government official told The Indian Express that the administration would soon issue instructions directing SPIOs to deposit their fines with the state exchequer. Sukhbir Siwach's extensive and in-depth coverage of farmer agitation against three farm laws during 2020-21 drew widespread attention. ... Read More
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Only civil courts can try land ownership or title disputes: Odisha HC
CUTTACK : In a significant ruling, the Orissa high court has held that revenue authorities cannot adjudicate disputes involving ownership or title to land, emphasising that such matters fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of civil courts. The vacation bench of Justice S K Panigrahi issued the order on May 30, setting aside an eviction order passed by the tehsildar of Dhamnagar under the Orissa Prevention of Land Encroachment (OPLE) Act, 1972. The case pertains to Dinabandhu Behera, who challenged the eviction proceedings initiated against him on the grounds that the state had erroneously recorded the disputed land in its name during the hal settlement. Behera claimed that his father had legally come into possession of the property after an 'ekpadia' (a written recognition) was issued by the ex-intermediary post-estate abolition. His father's name was subsequently recorded in the tenant ledger and rent was regularly paid to the govt. Upon his death, Behera came into possession of the land. But, despite these records, the tehsildar initiated eviction proceedings treating Behera as an encroacher. The sub-collector and collector of Bhadrak later upheld the eviction order. The HC, while setting aside all these orders, stated that the existence of a bona fide dispute over ownership and title renders summary eviction proceedings under the OPLE Act is inappropriate. "The revenue authorities, who conduct summary procedures, are not competent to adjudicate such complex disputes of title," Justice Panigrahi observed. The court further noted that Behera had already approached the civil judge, junior division, Dhamnagar, seeking declaration of his right, title and interest in the suit land. He had also prayed for a declaration that the encroachment proceedings were unsustainable, given the pending civil suit. Reaffirming the supremacy of civil courts in deciding title-related matters, the court ruled that "summary proceedings by revenue authorities cannot constitute the proper forum for adjudication where a bona fide dispute exists over title".
New Indian Express
5 hours ago
- New Indian Express
How legal reforms under Modi redefined women's safety
In 2012, the brutal Nirbhaya incident shocked the conscience of the nation. It also exposed the deep fissures in India's legal and administrative framework for women's safety. Inadequate policing, slow judicial response, outdated laws, and near-total absence of survivor support systems painted a bleak picture. By 2014, India stood at a crossroads. Public outrage was loud, but the legal machinery remained sluggish. Fast-track courts were a concept, not a reality. There were no one-stop solutions and centres, no national women's helplines, no forensic support to fast-track investigation, and no dedicated funds to support such measures. Women's issues were viewed as social concerns and national priorities. Modi Era: From Protection to Structural Empowerment Under the visionary leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Government of India has undertaken a paradigm shift—from a fragmented response to a mission-mode approach anchored in legal reform, institutional delivery, and dignity for every woman over the last 11 years of governance. Legal Safety as National Commitment The government initiated the establishment of Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) nationwide, and today, 745 such courts are operational, including 404 that exclusively deal with cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. In contrast to 2014, when One Stop Centres were non-existent, more than 820 districts now have fully functional OSCs providing legal assistance, police intervention, shelter, and counselling under one roof to any distressed women affected by violence.
