TN told to submit draft policy for trans persons by July 21
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Monday granted a month's time to the Tamil Nadu government to submit the draft policy for the welfare of trans persons. Justice N Anand Venkatesh, while hearing a batch of petitions related to issues faced by the LGBTQIA+ community, granted the social welfare department time till July 21 to file the draft policy.
The judge questioned the inordinate delay in finalising and submitting the draft in the court so that it could be circulated to the stakeholders to elicit their views.
Earlier this year, the department had informed the court that it was decided to frame two separate policies - one for trans persons and another for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer and asexual (LGBQA+) communities.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Consider delinking RTE funds from Samagra Shiksha dues, says HC
Chennai: Madras high court has directed the Union govt to consider delinking Right to Education Act (RTE) component from Samagra Shiksha Scheme dues to Tamil Nadu govt and disburse the money for reimbursing private schools. A division bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayanan passed the order on a plea moved by V Easwaran of Marumalarchi Iyakkam, based out of Coimbatore. "Duties under RTE Act are independent. Responsibilities such as fund allocation for implementing RTE Act lie with both Central and State govts. The Union must provide the specified percentage of funds to the State under the act," the bench said. According to petitioner, admissions under the RTE Act have not yet started this year due to non-payment of dues to private schools. In response, TN submitted that due to the non-allocation of funds by Union govt, the amount meant for private schools could not be provided. The state pointed out that although the central govt did not allocate the funds, it paid the private institutions from its own coffers between 2021 and 2023. The state further informed the high court that it has moved Supreme Court against the non-allocation of funds. The Union govt, on its part, informed the court that the funds were not released since the state failed to implement the new education policy.
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
Madras High Court Urges Centre To Release Withheld Funds To Tamil Nadu, Delinking RTE From NEP
Chennai: In a significant development, the Madras High Court has urged the Union Government to reconsider its decision to withhold Rs 2,152 crore in educational funds payable to Tamil Nadu, and recommended delinking the implementation of the Right to Education (RTE) Act from the state's adoption of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. The court observed that the Centre's obligation under the RTE Act is "independent" and must be honoured irrespective of whether a state government adopts NEP 2020 or not. It also underscored that both the Centre and the states have a concurrent responsibility to ensure the effective implementation of RTE provisions. An individual had approached the High Court alleging admission under the Right to Education Act has not commenced yet in private schools because of this issue. The state government claimed Union Government has not released funds under the Samagra Shiksha scheme since 2021 due to what it termed "political animosity" over the state's continued opposition to the NEP. According to the funding pattern, the Centre is mandated to contribute 60%, while the state bears the remaining 40%. The court refrained from issuing any binding directions as the Tamil Nadu government has already moved the Supreme Court on the matter. However, the bench made critical observations about the financial standoff, stating that the state government too cannot evade its obligation to reimburse private schools that admit children under the RTE Act. "The State cannot wriggle out of its commitments," the court stated, emphasizing that reimbursement to private institutions is not optional but a statutory requirement. Tamil Nadu has strongly opposed NEP 2020, calling it "regressive" and "against the principles of social justice." The ruling DMK government has also rejected the three-language policy, terming it a backdoor attempt to impose Hindi on non-Hindi-speaking states. It has also raised concerns over the NEP's emphasis on multiple public examinations in lower classes (III, V, and VIII), warning that such measures could increase school dropouts among underprivileged children. Another point of contention is the NEP's push for entrance examinations for undergraduate admissions in arts and science colleges. The Tamil Nadu government argues that such a system would make higher education inaccessible to students from economically weaker sections, reinforcing social inequalities. The BJP, however, has dismissed these allegations. Defending the NEP, the party asserted that the policy is a "visionary roadmap" intended to transform India into a developed nation by overhauling its education system. The party has clarified that the three-language formula is not meant to impose any language but to provide students with the opportunity to learn an additional Indian language, thereby promoting linguistic diversity.
NDTV
5 hours ago
- NDTV
Supreme Court Refuses To Reduce Lawyer's Sentence For Abusing Woman Judge, Says...
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today rejected a petition by a lawyer convicted of abusing a woman judicial officer in a court in Delhi. The top court refused to reduce the imprisonment sentence to 6 months and said, "Today, the majority of our officers in Delhi are women. They will not be able to function if somebody can get away like this. Think of their state," the bench commented orally. The bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice Manmohan was hearing a plea against the order of the Delhi High Court, which upheld the conviction of a lawyer who used abusive language towards a woman judge in a challan matter inside the trial court. The lawyer used abusive, vulgar expletives after the judge had adjourned the matter. While hearing the plea, Justice Manmohan verbally remarked, "Just see the inspection report, the language used, we cannot even say in the open court". Justice Manmohan further said that if a stern view is not taken against such behaviour, women judicial officers would not be ensured a safe work environment. "Today, the majority of our officers in Delhi are women. They will not be able to function like this- if somebody can get away like this. Think of their state," the bench said. The lawyer, Sanjay Rathore, was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for the offence under Section 509 (intending to outrage modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code, 3 months under Section 189 (injury to public servant), and an additional three months under Section 353 (assault or criminal force against public servant to deter them from their duty). The trial court directed that the sentences would run consecutively, resulting in a total sentence of two years. Later, the High Court said that the sentence would run concurrently and not consecutively, reducing his sentence to 18 months from two years The counsel for the petitioner urged the Supreme Court bench to reduce his term of imprisonment to six months. He stressed several "mitigating factors" for this consideration, like his ageing parents and young children. He informed that the Bar Council has also acted against the lawyer.
