Ravindra Chavan appointed state BJP president: At party meeting, Fadnavis, Rijiju take aim at Oppn
Addressing the gathering, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said, 'Ravindra Chavan's unwavering commitment and loyalty to the organisation earned him the highest post. He is a karyakarta who thinks and works for the organisation 24×7,' adding 'for the BJP the welfare of Maharashtra is supreme'.
On the controversy over the three-language policy, he said, 'We are not one to work under anybody' pressure. We have constituted a committee that will take an appropriate decision. Students' interest will be kept in sight and mind.'
'We have always accorded Marathi highest priority. And made Marathi language mandatory,' Fadnavis reiterated. 'We are not against Hindi language. We take pride in all Indian languages. Unfortunately, our opponents distorted facts for politics,' he said.
'Our rivals always raise the false bogey of how Marathi and Mumbai are undermined by the BJP before every elections. They will now start shouting how the government is out to divide Mumbai from Maharashtra. But by now, people have seen the Opposition's gimmicks,' he added.
Attacking opposition parties, Fadnavis said, 'During their tenure, sons of the soil were forced to relocate outside Mumbai. Whereas, after the BJP-led government came to power, we provided them homes within Mumbai. We have undertaken projects to transform the face of Mumbai and provide much needed relief to Mumbaikars.'
Addressing the gathering, Rijiju said, 'In the 2024 Lok Sabha polls, the opposition misled people on the threat to the Constitution. But in the Assembly polls, the Maharashtra BJP came back with absolute mandate. The Congress, which talks of the Constitution, is the one which ensured Dr B R Ambedkar defeat in the Lok Sabha polls from Maharashtra.'
Chavan expressed his gratitude to the party for the responsibility bestowed on him. 'We will devote our entire energy for organisational expansion keeping the 2029 Assembly polls in sight.
Union Minister of Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari said, 'Fadnavis and Chavan should work together to make Maharashtra leader in every sector.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
19 minutes ago
- First Post
Quad condemns cross-border terrorism in first joint statement after Pahalgam attack
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and her Japanese colleague, Takeshi Iwaya, all attended the conference in Washington read more Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Australia's Foreign Minister Penny Wong, Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stand together at the start of their meeting of the Indo-Pacific Quad at the State Department in Washington, D.C., U.S. Reuters The Quad released a joint statement on Wednesday, condemning cross-border terrorism following the Pahalgam attack of April 22 that killed 26 tourists. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and her Japanese colleague, Takeshi Iwaya, all attended the conference in Washington. 'The Quad condemns all acts of terrorism and violent extremism in all its forms and manifestations, including cross-border terrorism and renews our commitment to counterterrorism cooperation,' the joint statement said. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD It added, 'We condemn in the strongest terms the terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, which claimed the lives of 25 Indian nationals and one Nepali citizen, while injuring several others.' Refresh for updates.
Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
US trade talks: Trump makes big tariff statement again, puts ball firmly in India's court
India and the United States are in a race against time. With days to go, officials from both countries are scrambling to seal a Bilateral Trade Agreement before the 9 July cut-off. The deal, if done, could spare both sides a steep tariff spike. US President Donald Trump on Tuesday (local time) reaffirmed that India-US will soon strike a trade deal with "much less tariffs", allowing both countries to compete. President Donald Trump remains confident. Speaking to reporters, he said, "I think we are going to have a deal with India. And that is going to be a different kind of a deal. It is going to be a deal where we are able to go in and compete. Right now, India does not accept anybody in. I think India is going to do that, and if they do that, we are going to have a deal for much less tariffs." India and the US have been negotiating over a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) before the critical July 9 deadline of the 90-day pause on tariff escalations. Meanwhile, India has adopted a firmer stance on agricultural matters as high-stakes trade negotiations with the United States reach a pivotal moment, government sources said on Monday. Farm front lines But backroom talks in Washington are tense. India's delegation, led by Chief Negotiator Rajesh Agrawal, has extended its stay in a bid to close the gaps. Agriculture is the hardest nut to crack. Live Events One senior government source said bluntly, 'There is no question of conceding on dairy. That's a red line.' India's dairy sector supports over 80 million people. For Delhi, opening it up is politically unthinkable. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar underlined the stakes. 'We are in the middle, hopefully more than the middle, of a very intricate trade negotiation. Obviously, my hope would be that we bring it to a successful conclusion,' he told Newsweek. But he warned, 'There will have to be give and take.' Battles over beans and barriers Washington wants more. It is pressing India to slash duties on apples, nuts and genetically modified crops. The bigger goal is to tap India's massive farm market to trim a $45 billion trade gap. Richard Rossow at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies said, 'There are two real challenges to concluding an initial agreement. First on the list is US access to the Indian market for basic agriculture products. India will need to protect its basic agriculture sector for economic and political reasons.' The second headache? Non-tariff barriers. India's Quality Control Orders — more than 700 rules covering imports — block low-grade goods and push local manufacturing. Suman Berry at Niti Aayog called them a 'malign intervention' that drives up costs for small businesses. What's at stake No one wants a tariff war. If talks collapse, the suspended 26% levy snaps back. That would hit Indian exporters and American firms alike. Already, India's baseline 10% tariff remains. Trump's team is clear: if India holds firm on farm barriers, the US may look elsewhere. Still, there is hope for a middle path. Ajay Srivastava of Global Trade Research Initiative said, 'The next seven days could determine whether India and the US settle for a limited 'mini-deal' or walk away from the negotiating table — at least for now.' Mini-deal or bust? The likely outcome, experts say, is a slimmed-down pact. India could offer tariff cuts on cars, industrial goods and select farm products like almonds or ethanol. The US may push Delhi to buy oil, aircraft or ease rules for big retailers like Amazon and Walmart. Mr Rossow recalled how the original vision was clearer: 'The two leaders [Trump and Modi] laid out a simple concept in their first summit this year. The US would focus on manufactured goods that are capital-intensive, while India would focus on items that are labour-intensive.' Behind the immediate scramble is a bigger goal. Both sides want to lift trade from $191 billion now to $500 billion by 2030. Phase one aims to finish by autumn next year. But that dream rests on this week. If talks fail, tariffs bite. If they succeed, companies on both sides get a break. For now, all eyes are on Washington. Time is short, stakes high — and the farm fields of India have never loomed larger in a global trade deal. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Interview: I am not positioning myself as future CM, says Chirag Paswan
Union cabinet minister and LJP (RV) chief Chirag Paswan took everyone by surprise by his recent announcement that he wished to contest the Bihar assembly elections later this year. For the first time, his Lok Janshakti Party will contest in a pre-poll alliance with the ruling Janata Dal United (JDU). While Paswan's party has no presence in the current assembly, his party won all five seats it contested in last year's general elections. The 42-year-old son of LJP founder and former minister, the late Ram Vilas Paswan, has not been afraid to chart his own path, sometimes voicing opinions that may be different that of his alliance partner BJP. He spoke to HT about the reason he wants to contest, the Waqf law, and the proposal to amend the preamble to the constitution. LJP (Ram Vilas) chief Chirag Paswan spoke to HT about the reason he wants to contest, the Waqf law, and the proposal to amend the preamble to the constitution. (PTI) You dropped a bombshell by saying that you are going to contest. What did the Prime Minister and Amit Shah say in response to this? I have not spoken to them yet. I have expressed my wish that I want to go back to my state because this is my third term as a member of Parliament and over the past 11 years, I have realised that the kind of vision that I have for my state -- Bihar first, Bihari first-- is not possible (to achieve) living in Delhi. Also we have seen these experiments by the BJP, where they have fielded their MPs and even their central ministers for state elections, which really benefitted them. So, I have asked for a survey to analyse whether me contesting is beneficial for the party and for the alliance. What do you have to say to those people who say this is basically setting up Chirag Paswan to become a future CM candidate? To be very honest, I'm not. This is just not my agenda. I'm not looking for any post or positioning myself as a future CM. There is absolutely no vacancy in 2025. My current chief minister (Nitish Kumar), under his leadership, we're going to enter the elections and we will be having a historic win this time. So there's no vacancy this time. And even for the future But Deputy CM? No, no, no, no, no, no. I mean a) I'm not aiming for any post and b) I'll never be open to be a Deputy Chief Minister. Why? I mean, there are a lot of people in my party, in my state, whom I want to give this responsibility to. If there's such a circumstance coming up, they will be the one who will be taking over. The Bihar election 2020 was all about you against the current chief minister. You have made up with him? I'll not shy away from the fact there were a lot of differences between me and my chief minister, which were resolved before I got back into the alliance. In a way, I felt cornered in that alliance immediately after the (2019) Lok Sabha election. I felt that I was ignored. Also, that was the time when my father was not very well. And I do understand that at that time they must have thought that I was not that important. When I felt that I didn't have any say, if I had any issues or any concerns, the only platform I had at that time was a public platform or media. And that's the reason the differences between me and the CM were highlighted. But now I get that space. Not that I don't have concerns and issues now; of course I do have. But then I get that space within the alliance and they do get addressed as well. Was it awkward making up? No, not really. I think we are heading different parties and, if you are a different party, you have different ideologies. So, he (Kumar) knew, there are political compulsions. The Bharatiya Janata Party worked as a beautiful catalyst between the two of us. Naddaji (BJP chief and Union minister J P Nadda) played a very, very important role. I remember when my Chief Minister came back to the alliance (in 2024) and we were going to Bihar for his oath-taking ceremony in his chartered plane, we spoke a lot and he assured me that all my concerns and issues will be addressed. And in due course of time, it was done as well Recently, the Election Commission announced a special intensive revision of the electoral roll in Bihar. And it has caused a lot of controversy. I think this is one issue which has just been blown out of proportion. This process takes place on a regular basis. And you have to do this.I think India is one of those countries where the political parties and leaders are absolutely okay with having people living in their country without even knowing whether they are the actual citizens of your country or not. They are okay with having ghoospathiyas (infiltrators) in our country. Opposition is trying to establish this narrative that documents are needed, but you are given endless options to provide documentation. You are saying it is okay to do a citizenship drive months before elections? This is July, yes, we have time in hand. What is going to be the biggest issue of Bihar elections? I would love to have issues concerning unemployment, development, better infrastructure development. These are the topics that need to be addressed, discussed. Because I want to tell the people of my state how Bihar was in the 90s, during their tenure. Because right now what is happening is that my Chief Minister has been in the state for almost two decades now and the instant comparison that the first-time voters do, is with different states. They look at Delhi, Mumbai,and say it is so developed, why not Bihar? Because they don't know how Bihar was. I have seen that era . But then the problem is that when elections come, these narratives, ECI, Waqf Board emerge and election centres around communalism and casteism. Are you concerned about the Waqf Law? I am concerned. I was concerned. It is the reason why mine was one of those parties which very strongly asked the government that the bill be sent to a standing committee. I am happy that my Prime Minister took this decision to form a joint parliamentary committee. I wanted that all the stakeholders should get this opportunity to voice their opinions . I gave a lot of them, many of them were accepted too. See, anybody who goes through the amendments that have been made in Waqf law will understand that this is absolutely pro-poor Muslims. This is not a matter of dharam (faith), this is a matter of administration. Will the issue have an impact? I don't think so because I think any Muslim who is educated, comes from a poor background, understands that it is for his good. So, a handful of them think that they are losing control of the Waqf, they are the only ones who are panicking right now. Some of your cabinet colleagues have said the words inserted in the preamble in 1976, socialist and secular should be taken out. Where do you stand? To begin with, I come from a party, I am the son of a leader who is always a voice for socialism, for secularism out loud. I am not debating over these two words. But, when you don't support Emergency, any decision that was taken during the Emergency, I don't support . So, I don't support any decision that was taken (at the time), whether it was of nasbandi(sterilisation), beautification of Delhi (demolition drive in Turkman Gate) where the whole colony was destroyed and all the Muslims were thrown out. This (the change in the preamble) was taken during that time. Now, my belief is in Dr. Babasaheb Bheem Rao Ambedkar. My leader, Ram Vilas Paswanji always believed and followed the ideology of Babasaheb. Do you really think that during a detailed discussion over the formulation of the constitution, this was not discussed ? Whether the words like secularism should be the part of the constitution or not? And that too, when that committee was headed by Babasaheb. So, I am not getting into the merits of the words. The whole process how it was done and when it was done -- during Emergency -- that is our concern
