Monsoon session: Lok Sabha to discuss ST reservation bill in Goa assembly, merchant shipping bill
Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal will move The Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Bill, 2024, for its passage along with amendments.
New Delhi: On the fifth day of the monsoon session of Parliament, Lok Sabha on Friday is set to discuss key legislations, including The Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Bill and The Merchant Shipping Bill 2024.
Union Ports, Shipping, and Waterways Minister Sarbananda Sonowal will move The Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, for its passage in the Lower House.
The Bill aims to consolidate and amend the law relating to merchant shipping to ensure compliance with India's obligation under the maritime treaties and international instruments to which India is a party and also to ensure the development of Indian shipping and efficient maintenance of Indian mercantile marine in a manner best suited to serve the national interest and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, be taken into consideration.
The Standing Committee on External Affairs and the Public Accounts Committee will also table their reports on action taken by the government on the recommendations made by these panels on the various subjects, including 'India 's Engagement with G20 Countries'.
The Parliament has witnessed frequent adjournments for the last four days since it began on July 21. Yesterday, the proceedings in both houses of Parliament were adjourned for the day amid protests by the opposition.
The Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha will again reconvene at 11:00 AM today.
The Parliament session will continue till August 21. (ANI)
This report is auto-generated from ANI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Also read: Kharge joins INDIA bloc protest against Bihar electoral roll revision outside Parliament
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- Indian Express
To further tech manufacturing, India rethinks China blockade
Nearly half a decade ago, India adopted a 'China-out' strategy of sorts, in response to the border clashes in 2020, introduced an anti-Beijing foreign investment policy, and kept Chinese firms out of critical sectors like telecommunications. Now, however, necessitated by changing geopolitical dynamics, following US President Donald Trump's unprecedented onslaught on global trade, and India's own manufacturing ambitions, New Delhi is undertaking a serious rethink on the existing strategy, and is strongly considering particularly easing China-based entities' entry into the country, with some riders. The most recent sign of the thaw came in the form of a recommendation made by the government think tank Niti Aayog, earlier this month, to ease India's foreign direct investment (FDI) rules, which involves government scrutiny into investments made by Chinese firms. Earlier, the Economic Survey 2023-24 had sprung a surprise by advocating attracting investments from Chinese companies to boost exports. India had earlier put restrictions on investments from China through Press Note 3 in April 2020 to curb potential opportunistic takeovers of Indian companies during the Covid-19 pandemic by making a government approval mandatory for all investments from countries sharing a land border with India, including China. It continued to be in force in the wake of national security concerns due to border tensions after the Galwan clash. Early signs of a thaw There have been some signs that India is slowly, but surely, allowing Chinese companies to partner with Indian entities. Dixon Technologies, which is a major Indian electronics assembly company, received approval from the IT Ministry to set up a joint venture with China-based Longcheer. The new company will focus on manufacturing and supplying a wide range of electronics, including smartphones, tablets, true wireless stereo (TWS) devices, smartwatches, AI-powered PCs, automotive electronics, and healthcare devices. Dixon will hold 74 per cent in the JV, and the remaining 26 per cent will be with Longcheer. 'We can not continue to avoid China. The truth is, they make things which we need for our assembly operations, and if we want to go deeper into the supply chain, our companies have to work with Chinese companies,' a senior government official said. The IT Ministry, earlier this year, notified a Rs 23,000 crore policy for electronic components manufacturing, and it is widely anticipated that Indian firms would partner with Chinese entities to participate in the scheme, given the expertise they have. Recently, India also resumed issuance of tourist visas to Chinese nationals as part of a broader effort to repair bilateral ties. Earlier this month, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar travelled to China where he had underlined that 'differences should not become disputes' nor should 'competition ever become conflict' and that while India and China have made good progress in the past nine months towards the normalisation of bilateral relations, they should work to address de-escalation on the border. China out in letter, not in spirit, and some repercussions Of course, while the government managed to keep China out in some sectors like finished smartphones, imports from the country continued, particularly for a number of electronic components, which are crucial for the final assembly process in India, but for which New Delhi has little to no production base. The Indian Express had earlier reported that the financial year 2023-24, India imported electronic components worth over $12 billion from China and $6 billion from Hong Kong, with the two accounting for more than half of total such imports to India – suggesting that the country's growing footprint in electronics manufacturing was not necessarily into reduced reliance on Beijing. In the last five years, electronics imports from China and Hong Kong have far outnumbered imports from other major manufacturing hubs like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and all ASEAN countries, combined. China, for its own part, and seeing India's growing manufacturing footprint, also imposed restrictions on its companies, making it harder for them to do business with Indian firms. For instance, India's share in US smartphone imports surged to nearly 36 per cent in the first five months of 2025, from about 11 per cent in 2024. China, which continues to dominate the product category, saw its share drop from 82 per cent to 49 per cent over the same period, this paper had reported earlier. China's actions include pulling workers out of India, and making it more difficult for India-based manufacturing companies to obtain capital goods, which are needed for the assembly process. China has also imposed a blockade on several rare earth metals and magnets, and while the prime target of that restriction is the United States, India has found itself caught in the crosshairs. Soumyarendra Barik is Special Correspondent with The Indian Express and reports on the intersection of technology, policy and society. With over five years of newsroom experience, he has reported on issues of gig workers' rights, privacy, India's prevalent digital divide and a range of other policy interventions that impact big tech companies. He once also tailed a food delivery worker for over 12 hours to quantify the amount of money they make, and the pain they go through while doing so. In his free time, he likes to nerd about watches, Formula 1 and football. ... Read More
Hindustan Times
20 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Rahul Gandhi to 'adopt' 22 orphaned children from Poonch affected by Pakistani shelling
Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, will adopt 22 children from Jammu and Kashmir's Poonch district who lost their parents or family breadwinners in the cross-border conflict during Operation Sindoor. Rahul Gandhi with children and families affected by cross-border shelling by Pakistan during Operation Sindoor.(Congress) The education of these children, many of whom were orphaned in the wake of Pakistani shelling, will be fully funded by Gandhi, with support continuing until they complete their graduation, The Indian Express reported, quoting Jammu and Kashmir Congress chief Tariq Hamid Karra. He said the first aid instalment will be released this week to ensure the students can continue their schooling without interruption. 'Why did you stop?': Rahul Gandhi interjects as Rajnath Singh details Operation Sindoor ceasefire | Watch Gandhi, during a visit to Poonch in May, asked local party leaders to compile a list of affected children. Subsequently, a survey was conducted, and the names of the children were finalised after cross-checking government records. During his visit, Gandhi also stopped at Christ Public School to meet classmates of Urba Fatima and Zain Ali, 12-year-old twins who died in the shelling. Also Read | Cong's Manish Tewari hints with a song why he didn't speak in Op Sindoor debate, references Shashi Tharoor too Speaking to the children, the Congress MP also offered some words of comfort. 'I feel very, very proud of you. You miss your little friends. I'm very sorry about that. Now, you feel a little bit of danger and a little frightened, but don't worry; everything will go back to normal. Your way of responding to this should be to study really hard, play really hard and make a lot of friends in school,' the publication quoted Gandhi as saying. Poonch, one of the regions hit hardest by the Pakistani shelling, saw several civilians, including children, injured. Among the lives lost was Vihaan Bhargav, a young boy killed by shrapnel as his family tried to escape the escalating violence. Operation Sindoor was carried out in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, which claimed the lives of 26 people on April 22 this year. In retaliation, India targeted nine terror hubs across Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir and Pakistan and neutralised over 100 terrorists. After the May 7 operations, India and Pakistan reached a cessation of hostilities understanding on May 10.
Indian Express
20 minutes 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'.
