Schools' closure a political decision, says Akhilesh
2
Lucknow: Describing BJP govt's move to shut 26,000 schools and merge another 5,000 as a political decision, SP chief
Akhilesh Yadav
on Thursday said the schools being closed are the ones where polling was held in previous elections and SP had won.
Akhilesh described the decision as against the Constitution. "The right to education is enshrined in the Constitution. BJP govt is depriving the people of their constitutional right" he told reporters at the Parliament House complex.
He said it was the responsibility of govt to ensure that every child had free and easy access to education and schools should be near their homes. "BJP govt is not bothered about education but more concerned about where the polling stations would come up," Akhilesh said.
They (BJP govt) are shutting schools for the sake of votes, he said.
The former UP CM said all projects initiated during the SP govt to improve the education system in the state were either abandoned or shut by the BJP govt. "Like the Sanskriti schools in Delhi, a Sanskriti school was set-up in Lucknow during the SP govt. But BJP closed it," he said. He said BJP was biased against the PDA and it was for this reason that SP functionaries have launched PDA Pathshala in villages where schools have been closed.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Libas Purple Days Sale
Libas
Undo
'BJP wants to whip up emotions: Akhilesh
Lucknow: The BJP govt does not work on economy but on emotions. It wants to whip up emotions to win elections and not concerned about the well being of people, said Akhilesh Yadav. He said lakhs of Indians are shifting abroad every year but govt has done nothing to check that. "Many people fled India after taking heavy loans, pushing banks towards bankruptcy. The BJP govt has outsourced jobs to end reservation," he said.
On the US imposing heavy tariffs on India, Akhilesh questioned the claims of the BJP about the 11-year-old friendship between PM Modi and president Donald Trump.
'PDA pathshalas force govt to recall order on merger of schools''
Lucknow: Akhilesh on Thursday said volunteers having started PDA Pathshalas across the state forced the UP govt to recall its order on merger of 5,000 schools. "Recalling its decision on the merger of schools is a mega victory of PDA Pathshalas. Right to education cannot be and will never get compromised. It is a moral defeat of the BJP which is anti-education," Akhilesh posted on X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
6 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of state's Land Revenue Act
Shimla, In a major setback to encroachers on government lands, the Himachal Pradesh High Court on Tuesday struck down the section 163-A of Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act 1954, allowing regularisation of encroachments on government lands, terming the section as unconstitutional. Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of state's Land Revenue Act A division bench of the High Court consisting of Justice Vivek Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi ruled that the "Section 163-A of HP Land Revenue Act is manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional and as a consequence the section and the rules framed there under the said section are quashed". Putting an end to long litigation, the judgment directed the state government to initiate eviction proceedings expeditiously against all such encroachments that were to be covered under the section 163A, preferably on or before February 28, 2026. The dimensions of the encroachments can be measured from the reply of the government which said that there were approximately 57,549 cases of encroachment covering an area of about 1,23,835 bighas of government land. The encroached government land is about 10,320 hectares and in terms of the rules framed under the impugned provision, 1,67,339 applications were received for regularisation up to August 15, 2002 and taking into account the magnitude of encroachments, the high court directed the state government to consider an amendment in the law pertaining to "criminal trespass". The high court clearly stated that any stay granted against removal of encroachment shall stand vacated and also directed the government to make suitable changes in law by amending the relevant Act and rules appropriately to assign duty on the office bearers of Nagar Panchayat, Nagar Parishad and Nagar Nigam as well as executive officer/commissioner concerned to report the encroachment for taking action to remove of encroachment. The HC also instructed the advocate general to transmit the copy of the judgment to the chief secretary of the sate government and all concerned with immediate compliance. Since 1983, successive governments issued various notifications for regularisation of encroachments and the July 4, 1983 notification permitted regularisation up to five bighas on a nominal fee of ₹50 per bigha. Section 163-A was introduced in 2002 during the first tenure of the then chief minister Prem Kumar Dhumal to frame rules for regularising encroachments, with the stated objective of helping small and marginal farmers. However, the High Court on Tuesday ruled that the provision was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before law and attempted to legitimise illegal acts. "The impugned provision is in fact legislation for a class of dishonest persons and equality cannot be claimed in illegality," the judgment said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
News18
16 minutes ago
- News18
Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of states Land Revenue Act
Last Updated: Shimla, Aug 5 (PTI) In a major setback to encroachers on government lands, the Himachal Pradesh High Court on Tuesday struck down the section 163-A of Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act 1954, allowing regularisation of encroachments on government lands, terming the section as unconstitutional. A division bench of the High Court consisting of Justice Vivek Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi ruled that the 'Section 163-A of HP Land Revenue Act is manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional and as a consequence the section and the rules framed there under the said section are quashed". Putting an end to long litigation, the judgment directed the state government to initiate eviction proceedings expeditiously against all such encroachments that were to be covered under the section 163A, preferably on or before February 28, 2026. The dimensions of the encroachments can be measured from the reply of the government which said that there were approximately 57,549 cases of encroachment covering an area of about 1,23,835 bighas of government land. The encroached government land is about 10,320 hectares and in terms of the rules framed under the impugned provision, 1,67,339 applications were received for regularisation up to August 15, 2002 and taking into account the magnitude of encroachments, the high court directed the state government to consider an amendment in the law pertaining to 'criminal trespass". The HC also instructed the advocate general to transmit the copy of the judgment to the chief secretary of the sate government and all concerned with immediate compliance. Since 1983, successive governments issued various notifications for regularisation of encroachments and the July 4, 1983 notification permitted regularisation up to five bighas on a nominal fee of Rs 50 per bigha. Section 163-A was introduced in 2002 during the first tenure of the then chief minister Prem Kumar Dhumal to frame rules for regularising encroachments, with the stated objective of helping small and marginal farmers. However, the High Court on Tuesday ruled that the provision was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before law and attempted to legitimise illegal acts. 'The impugned provision is in fact legislation for a class of dishonest persons and equality cannot be claimed in illegality," the judgment said. PTI BPL MNK MNK MNK view comments First Published: August 06, 2025, 01:15 IST 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.
India Today
17 minutes ago
- India Today
Opposition questions Aarti Sathe's nomination to bench citing political past
The Supreme Court Collegium's recommendation of advocate Aarti Sathe for elevation as a judge has stirred political controversy, with opposition parties in Maharashtra raising concerns over her past political affiliations. Sathe, they claim, served as a BJP spokesperson between 2023 and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), however, clarified that Sathe had resigned from all party positions and primary membership in early Sathe hails from a family of legal professionals. Her father, senior counsel Arun Sathe, is also known to have been active in politics, according to some lawyers practising in the Bombay High Court. Sathe is reported to specialise in tax disputes, matters before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) and SEBI, as well as matrimonial cases. The Maharashtra unit of the Indian National Congress posted on X, criticising the recommendation. In a strongly worded statement, the party said, 'The height of shamelessness. Shockingly, BJP spokespersons are being selected as judges. The BJP has openly started a cruel mockery of democracy.'Rohit Pawar, leader of the NCP's Sharad Pawar faction, also voiced objections via a post on X. He shared a screenshot from a now-defunct social media account of Sathe, in which she had announced her appointment as BJP spokesperson in Mumbai, accompanied by a folded hands wrote: 'The appointment of a person who advocates for the ruling party from a public platform as a judge is the greatest blow to democracy. This will have far-reaching consequences on the impartiality of the Indian judicial system. Merely possessing the qualifications to become a judge and appointing politically affiliated individuals directly as judges—isn't this tantamount to turning the judiciary into a political arena?'He further questioned the neutrality of judicial appointments: 'When a person appointed as a judge in a high court has a political background and has held a position in the ruling party, who can guarantee that the process of delivering justice will not be tainted by political bias? Doesn't the appointment of a single political figure raise questions about the entire process of justice delivery?'In response, BJP Maharashtra media head Navnath Ban dismissed the allegations as baseless. In his reply to Pawar on X, he wrote: 'False accusations should not be made recklessly. Aarti Sathe resigned from the position of BJP spokesperson on January 6, 2024. The resignation letter was submitted to the then state president Chandrashekhar Bawankule and Mumbai BJP president Ashish Shelar.'Ban also posted a copy of Sathe's resignation letter, in which she stepped down from her roles as BJP Mumbai spokesperson, Head of the BJP Mumbai Legal Cell, and primary membership of the party. The letter cited personal and professional reasons and stated that she would no longer be able to discharge her duties in those Supreme Court Collegium, led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and comprising other senior judges, interviews prospective candidates and forwards recommendations to the central government for judicial appointments. On July 28, the Collegium recommended three names for elevation, including Sathe's. The central government is yet to act on the recommendations.- Ends IN THIS STORY#Maharashtra
