Union Minister of State for Defence announces plan to expand NCC by three lakh cadets
After inaugurating the Special Joint State Representatives and Additional/Deputy Directors General Conference of the NCC in Bhopal, Mr. Seth highlighted its role in nation building and youth development. Listing the initiatives, he spoke about the inclusion of ex-servicemen as NCC instructors, providing new employment avenues for veterans and lauded the NCC's active involvement in national campaigns such as the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Naya Savera Scheme, and Nasha Mukt Bharat Abhiyan.
He also congratulated the NCC Mount Everest Expedition team for their successful summit on May 18 describing it as a powerful example of cadet courage and resilience. Calling for continued Centre-State collaboration, Mr. Seth urged the States to fulfil their commitments towards manpower, infrastructure, and funding to support the expansion.
'Director General NCC Lieutenant General Gurbirpal Singh outlined the Corps' achievements and roadmap ahead, with a focus on establishing robust training and camping infrastructure nationwide. He emphasised the goal of fostering greater youth participation and improving cadet performance,' said a release.
Among those present on the occasion were Ministers of Education and Youth Affairs & Sports, senior Defence Ministry officials, State Department representatives, and NCC heads from all States.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
World Will Listen To Us If We Become Strong In All Sectors: Nitin Gadkari
Nagpur: Union minister Nitin Gadkari on Thursday pitched for making India a superpower and " vishwaguru", saying the world would certainly listen to India if it becomes strong in every sector. The Road Transport and Highways Minister was addressing a gathering at a programme to mark 'Akhand Bharat Sankalp Din' organised by the Rashtra Nirman Samiti (social organisation) in Nagpur. "We recall this day because on this day in 1947, the country was divided into two - India and Pakistan. We all, as a mission, accept that our country's partition was unnatural, and one day, our country will become ' akhand ' (unified). This is the resolve we take today in this programme," he said. Mr Gadkari praised India's unity in diversity and also lauded the country's armed forces. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has resolved to make India a 5 trillion-dollar economy, the third-largest economy in the world, as well as " atmanirbhar" and " vishwaguru", he noted, adding all these resolutions will be achieved with the efforts of every Indian. "If we become strong in every sector, then certainly the world will listen to us. Those who are strong in economics, defence, science and technology and those who are progressing in agriculture and business, and a country whose citizens are patriots and cultured, that country can only become vishwaguru," he said. Mr Gadkari praised the Rashtra Nirman Samiti for invoking the thought of "Akhand Bharat" among the people. "When we are taking the resolution for 'Akhand Bharat' today, we should also resolve to make a superpower country which is progressive, prosperous and powerful," he said. Mr Gadkari also raised concerns over road accidents, and underlined the importance of creating awareness among the youth about following the road safety rules. (Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
India.com
2 hours ago
- India.com
‘Ground Reality Can't Be Ignored': Supreme Court Points To Pahalgam Horror In J&K Statehood Plea
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Union government to clarify its position on a series of applications seeking a time-bound restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir and emphasised that ground realities must be taken into account. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran was hearing petitions that argued the prolonged delay in restoring statehood is 'seriously impacting the rights of the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and undermining the principle of federalism.' The Bench underscored the significance of the Pahalgam issue during the proceedings. The applicants contended that the absence of a clearly defined timeline for restoring statehood constitutes a breach of federalism, which they emphasised is an integral part of the Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution. 'It has been 21 months since the Article 370 judgment. There has been no movement towards the restoration of statehood,' submitted senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, adding that the Constitution Bench had trusted the Union government when the Solicitor General assured it that statehood would be restored. On the other hand, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, questioning the maintainability of the applications, urged the apex court to consider the 'peculiar position' in Jammu and Kashmir and sought that the pleas be listed after eight weeks, saying this was not the 'correct stage' to consider the matter. 'The MAs (miscellaneous applications) are not maintainable. We had assured two things: the election would be held, and thereafter, the statehood. Your lordships are aware of the peculiar position emerging from this part of our country. There are several considerations,' said SG Mehta. 'I don't know why, at this stage, this issue is agitated, but list it after 8 weeks. I will take instructions. My prayer is for eight weeks because this particular stage is not the correct stage to muddy the water,' Mehta added. After hearing the submissions, the CJI Gavai-led Bench listed the matter after eight weeks. In 're: Article 370 of the Constitution' verdict, a 5-judge Constitution Bench, headed by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, had left open the question of whether the Parliament can extinguish the character of statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories, relying on an oral statement made on Centre's behalf that statehood would be restored to Jammu and Kashmir. In the course of the oral hearing, the Solicitor General, the second-highest law officer of the Centre, had submitted that the Union Home Ministry cannot give any exact timeframe and it would take "some time" for the restoration of statehood in Jammu and Kashmir. However, the Constitution Bench, also comprising Justices S.K. Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Gavai and Surya Kant, had ordered the Election Commission of India (ECI) to take steps to conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, constituted under Section 14 of the Reorganisation Act, by September 30, 2024, and said that "restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible". It had upheld the status of Ladakh as a Union Territory under Article 3(a) read with Explanation I of the Constitution, which permits the formation of a Union Territory by separating a territory from any state. In May 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed review petitions challenging its verdict, stating there was 'no error apparent on the face of the record' and refused to list the matter in open court.
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
Supreme Court seeks Centre's stand on pleas seeking restoration of J&K statehood
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the Union government's stand on a batch of applications demanding the time-bound restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir. A Bench of CJI B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran was hearing pleas contending that the continued delay in restoring statehood is "gravely affecting the rights of the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and also violating the idea of federalism". The applications argued that the failure to restore statehood within a time-bound framework amounts to a violation of federalism, which forms part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution. 'It has been 21 months since the Article 370 judgment. There has been no movement towards the restoration of statehood,' submitted senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, adding that the Constitution Bench had trusted the Union government when the Solicitor General assured it that statehood would be restored. On the other hand, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, questioning the maintainability of the applications, urged the apex court to consider the 'peculiar position' in Jammu and Kashmir and sought that the pleas be listed after eight weeks, saying this was not the 'correct stage' to consider the matter. 'The MAs (miscellaneous applications) are not maintainable. We had assured two things: the election would be held, and thereafter, the statehood. Your lordships are aware of the peculiar position emerging from this part of our country. There are several considerations,' said SG Mehta. 'I don't know why, at this stage, this issue is agitated, but list it after 8 weeks. I will take instructions. My prayer is for eight weeks because this particular stage is not the correct stage to muddy the water,' Mehta added. After hearing the submissions, the CJI Gavai-led Bench listed the matter after eight weeks. In 're: Article 370 of the Constitution' verdict, a 5-judge Constitution Bench, headed by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, had left open the question of whether the Parliament can extinguish the character of statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories, relying on an oral statement made on Centre's behalf that statehood would be restored to Jammu and Kashmir. In the course of the oral hearing, the Solicitor General, the second-highest law officer of the Centre, had submitted that the Union Home Ministry cannot give any exact timeframe and it would take "some time" for the restoration of statehood in Jammu and Kashmir. However, the Constitution Bench, also comprising Justices S.K. Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Gavai and Surya Kant, had ordered the Election Commission of India (ECI) to take steps to conduct elections to the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, constituted under Section 14 of the Reorganisation Act, by September 30, 2024, and said that "restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible". It had upheld the status of Ladakh as a Union Territory under Article 3(a) read with Explanation I of the Constitution, which permits the formation of a Union Territory by separating a territory from any state. In May 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed review petitions challenging its verdict, stating there was 'no error apparent on the face of the record' and refused to list the matter in open court.
