Punjab Land Pooling Policy: ‘Pass resolutions that you will not part with your land', Sukhbir Badal tells panchayats
Addressing a 'dharna' outside the deputy commissioner's office in Ludhiana, Badal demanded the immediate revocation of AAP government's plan to acquire 40,000 acres of land under its land pooling policy. He said SAD would intensify the agitation against the 'land grab' by holding weekly 'dharnas', with protests being held on July 28 in Mohali and on August 4 in Bathinda.
Badal also accused AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal of being behind this 'loot in league with builders of Delhi who had been promised large land parcels as per their wishes'.
'I warn the chief secretary, who has been made chairman of all development authorities, as well as their members that they would be held accountable for illegalities being committed in land acquisition processes in the state,' he added.
Badal claimed that the AAP government proposed to acquire 40,000 acres of land, including 24,000 in Ludhiana itself, under the archaic State Land Acquisition Act, 1995 instead of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
He said the 1995 law allowed for excluding land parcels from acquisition and lease as well as allowing auction or allotment of land as per the wishes of the ruling dispensation.
'This will open the doors for corruption and allow select parcels to be excluded from auction at the whims and fancies of the government. In direct contrast, the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 calls for giving compensation at four times the collector rate besides a resettlement scheme,' he said, claiming that under the land-pooling policy, the small farmers will be the biggest losers.
'Those possessing 50 acres of land would be eligible to get back 60 per cent of the same, whereas those possessing nine acres would only get 33 per cent back. Farmers would additionally not be allowed to sell the land, take loan on it or undertake change of land use (CLU) once the notification for acquisition is done', he said.
Senior party leader Dr Daljit Singh Cheema said Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann had tried to justify the policy. He said if the policy had been made keeping in mind the welfare of farmers then the chief minister should tell why he has been replaced as chairman of development authorities and gave this post to the chief secretary.
On the issue of sacrilege incidents in 2015, when the SAD-BJP government was in power, Badal said such incidents started in Punjab only after the advent of AAP in the state in 2014. He said the issue of sacrilege was used to defame the SAD by both the AAP and the Congress to stop the Akali juggernaut, which would have otherwise swept the state for the third successive term in 2017. He said these elements did not allow a state probe into the cases of sacrilege and demanded they be handed over to the CBI. 'We transferred the cases to the CBI from where they were taken back by the Congress. Since then only politics has been done on this sensitive issue by both the AAP and Congress even as the culprits roam free,' Badal said. In stark contrast, he said, the SAD had got to the bottom of both Moga and Malerkotla sacrilege cases and ensured conviction.
Badal also accused Kejriwal of supporting AAP MLA legislator Naresh Yadav, who was accused of committing the Malerkotla sacrilege. 'The AAP government forced the complainant to take back his complaint. Later despite being convicted, Kejriwal re-nominated Yadav for the party ticket from Mehrauli (in Delhi). All this only goes on to prove that AAP leaders had a hand in sacrilege incidents. We will get to the bottom of this once the SAD forms the government and punish the perpetrators', he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
3 minutes ago
- Hans India
Political Tensions Escalate As Suvendu Adhikari's Convoy Faces Attack In West Bengal's Coochbehar
A significant political confrontation unfolded in West Bengal's Coochbehar district when BJP leader and Leader of Opposition Suvendu Adhikari's convoy was allegedly attacked and vandalized by Trinamool Congress workers during his official visit on Tuesday. The incident has sparked intense blame games between the two major political parties, with each side presenting contrasting narratives about the events. The attack occurred while Adhikari was traveling to the Coochbehar Superintendent of Police's office to submit a formal deputation regarding alleged harassment of BJP workers in the district. This visit was part of his ongoing efforts to address what his party claims are systematic attacks on their supporters and local leaders in the region. Video footage from the scene revealed Adhikari's convoy attempting to navigate through a massive Trinamool Congress protest, where party workers were prominently displaying black flags and chanting aggressive slogans. The confrontation resulted in visible damage to at least two vehicles in the convoy, including a police vehicle and the pilot car, both of which suffered shattered windshields during the altercation. According to BJP leaders present at the scene, a large mob carrying Trinamool party flags and black flags assembled at Khagrabari crossing around 12:35 PM, strategically positioning themselves as Adhikari's convoy approached the area. The protesters reportedly engaged in hostile behavior, shouting "go back Suvendu" slogans and even resorting to throwing shoes at the BJP leader's vehicle, escalating the confrontation beyond mere verbal protests. The BJP has directly linked this incident to a recent attack in Ghoksadanga, where a local BJP MLA's car was vandalized, suggesting a pattern of targeted violence against their party members. In response to these alleged attacks, Adhikari had previously called for a meeting with 65 BJP MLAs and had planned to directly confront the district police chief about the deteriorating law and order situation. The Trinamool Congress, however, has vehemently denied orchestrating any attack, dismissing the entire incident as a "well-scripted drama" by the BJP. The Mamata Banerjee-led party maintains that the confrontation was politically motivated and designed to create controversy rather than being a genuine security threat. Anticipating Adhikari's visit, the Coochbehar District Trinamool Congress had strategically announced a series of counter-programs aimed at challenging the BJP leader's presence in the area. TMC district president Abhijit De Bhowmik had declared that the party would conduct anti-NRC protests across 19 different locations throughout the district on the same day as Adhikari's visit. These planned protests were scheduled to take place in various strategic areas including Baburhat, Ghughumari, Mathabhanga, Sitai, Changrabandha, Tufanganj, and Bhetaguri. The Trinamool Congress had mobilized thousands of supporters and positioned them at all entry points into Coochbehar until 2 PM, creating a tense atmosphere that required significant security deployment. The widespread nature of the TMC protests and their strategic positioning at entry points suggests a coordinated effort to challenge Adhikari's movement within the district. This level of organization indicates the high political stakes involved and the intensity of the rivalry between the two parties in the region. The incident has heightened political tensions in West Bengal, where the BJP and Trinamool Congress have been engaged in an ongoing battle for political supremacy. The attack on Adhikari's convoy represents another escalation in what both parties describe as systematic targeting by their opponents. Local authorities deployed heavy security throughout the district in response to the planned protests and anticipated confrontations. Despite the significant police presence and the severity of the alleged attack, West Bengal Police has not yet issued any official statement regarding the incident or announced any arrests in connection with the convoy attack. The absence of an official police response has raised questions about the handling of the situation and may contribute to further political controversy. Both parties are likely to use this incident to strengthen their respective narratives about political violence and victimization in the state. This confrontation reflects the broader political climate in West Bengal, where tensions between the ruling Trinamool Congress and the opposition BJP continue to manifest in various forms of political conflict and street-level confrontations.
NDTV
17 minutes ago
- NDTV
Amit Shah Breaks LK Advani's Record To Become Longest-Serving Home Minister
New Delhi: Amit Shah has become the longest-serving Union Minister of Home Affairs of India on Tuesday. With 2,258 days in office since assuming the role on May 30, 2019, Mr Shah has now surpassed the previous record held by senior BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani. Mr Shah's tenure has also overtaken that of Congress stalwart Govind Ballabh Pant, cementing his position as a key pillar in the current National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government. Coincidentally, Mr Shah achieved this milestone on August 5, the date he announced the abrogation of Article 370 in Parliament in 2019, ending the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. Before Amit Shah, the leaders who served the longest tenures as Home Minister include Congress leader Govind Ballabh Pant and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Lal Krishna Advani. Previously, BJP stalwart Lal Krishna Advani had held the position for 2,256 days (from March 19, 1998, to May 22, 2004). In comparison, Amit Shah has been serving as Home Minister since May 30, 2019, and by August 4, 2025, he will have completed 2,258 days in office. Govind Ballabh Pant served from January 10, 1955, to March 7, 1961, a total of 6 years and 56 days. Mr Shah became the country's Home Minister on May 30 2019, and remained in the post till June 9 2024. He again became Home Minister on June 10 2024, and is serving. Apart from the Home Ministry, he is also the country's first Cooperation Minister. Apart from this, Amit Shah had also served as Gujarat Home Minister and held the position of BJP National President. The tenure of Amit Shah as Union Home Minister, under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has been marked by several transformative developments in India's internal security landscape. The historic abrogation of Article 370 and the withdrawal of Jammu and Kashmir's special status stand out as landmark decisions. The region has since witnessed a dramatic improvement in law and order, with stone pelting incidents virtually eliminated. Across the country, there has been a sharp decline in areas affected by Left-Wing Extremism, Naxalism, and Maoist activities. The peaceful progress in the construction of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple, the introduction of new criminal justice laws, and the successful enactment and rollout of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) further highlight this period. Multiple peace agreements in the North East have brought resolution to several long-standing insurgencies, making this a period of significant consolidation in the country's internal security framework.
Economic Times
34 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Student leaves Bluebells School after not paying fee for four years, now court orders parents to pay Rs 1.2 lakh with interest
Synopsis A Delhi court has ordered a parent to pay ₹1.2 lakh in pending school fees, even as the state government tables a bill to regulate private school fee hikes. The Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025 aims to curb arbitrary increases and involve parents in decision-making. Critics, including AAP and parent bodies, say the bill fails to protect families and gives more power to school managements. The legislation has stirred sharp debate both inside and outside the Assembly. Agencies high nursersy school fee A civil court in Delhi has directed a father to clear outstanding school fees amounting to over ₹1.2 lakh, with 10 percent interest. The student had attended Bluebells School International in south Delhi. Civil Judge Yashu Khurana said the suit filed by the school went unchallenged, as the parent, Virender Rana, did not appear to contest it. 'The case of the school stands duly proved by virtue of unchallenged suit and the documents placed on record,' said Advocate Atul Jain, appearing for the school told the court that the father had failed to pay fees across four academic years: 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21. The student eventually left the school in 2022 while in Class VII. In its plea, the school submitted that Rana 'under the shield of the directorate of education order dated Aug 1, 2018, regarding the fee structure of the school for the year 2017-18 and in the guise of the fact that the issue regarding the same was sub judice before Delhi High Court, long delayed the payment of the dues.'The school also argued that it relied entirely on parental fees to function. The judge observed, 'Perusal of the record shows that the present suit was filed on Oct 16, 2024, whereas the cause of action last arose upon the plaintiff on Feb 7, 2024, when the defendant made the last payment against the outstanding amount.'On the same day that this ruling gained attention, Delhi Education Minister Ashish Sood presented a new bill in the Assembly aimed at regulating private school fees. The Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025, introduced during the Monsoon Session, promises to bring more oversight to how private unaided schools set and raise their fees.'Education is not a thing to be sold. This bill aims to halt the commercialisation of education. We are bringing the bill to take action against those mafias who are selling education,' said draft legislation, which had received Cabinet approval in April, covers all 1,677 private unaided schools in the proposes structural changes, including a grievance redressal system, caps on fee increases, parent representation in decisions, and penalties of up to ₹10 lakh for violations. Sood called it a 'permanent solution to a long-ignored issue that affects millions of parents and children in Delhi.'He also added, 'This bill is a small effort on our part to honour Dr. Mukherjee's vision and to ensure that education does not become a burden on the people of India, but instead becomes a path leading them to a better future.'The new bill introduces a three-tier regulatory framework meant to vet fee hike proposals and resolve private school must form a committee by 15 July each year. It will include five randomly selected parents from the Parent-Teacher Association, with at least two women and one member from SC, ST or other backward communities. A representative from the Directorate of Education (DoE) will also be on the panel, which is chaired by a school management must submit their fee proposal to this committee by 31 July. If approved by 15 September, that fee structure stays fixed for the next three academic if at least 15 percent of the school's parents disagree, they can escalate the matter to the district-level appellate committee by 30 committee will examine disputes and must deliver a decision within 45 days. If the conflict is unresolved, the final appeal lies with the Revision highest-tier body will give binding rulings that will remain valid for three years. According to Section 8 of the bill, criteria for setting fees will include the school's location, infrastructure, staff salaries and revenue 12 sets the penalties. An unauthorised fee hike could attract a fine between ₹1 lakh and ₹10 lakh, doubling every 20 days until compliance. Persistent offenders may be forced to refund overcharged fees and could lose school Delhi government argues that the bill will increase transparency and curb profiteering. It mandates schools to submit audited financials and infrastructure costs before proposing any fee hike. It also allows the Director of Education to order fee rollbacks and refunds if the hike is deemed many parents and political opponents remain of Opposition Atishi has strongly criticised the bill. 'After letting private schools hike fees unchecked for four months, the BJP now brings a sham bill that hands control to school owners, blocks parent voices, and protects profiteers,' she Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has demanded that the bill be referred to a Select Committee and that all fee hikes for the 2024–25 academic year be frozen. Atishi also pointed out that introducing the bill after the academic session had already started allowed schools time to raise fees without parents' groups have raised questions about the bill's design. The biggest concern revolves around the 15 percent threshold required to challenge a school's fee decision. Critics argue that this is an unrealistically high bar and effectively prevents parents from raising objections.'Requiring a minimum of 15 percent of a school's parents to challenge the school-level Fee Regulatory Committee's decision before the district committee is nearly impossible. It effectively denies parents the right to contest arbitrary fee hikes,' said Ashok Agarwal, chairperson of the All India Parents Association, speaking to The worry about the selection process for the parent members on the committee. Some feel it opens the door to tokenism and weakens true bill does attempt to set clear limits: Schools can raise fees only once per academic year with prior approval They must disclose financial and operational data A three-stage complaints system is now in place Penalties are defined and severe for unauthorised hikes But gaps remain. There are no provisions to freeze current hikes, no retrospective control over hikes already enforced this year, and no strong deterrent against non-tuition charges. The school-led committees may also lack the independence needed for fair the bill does not provide safeguards for students who may face expulsion due to fee Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025 is a long-awaited intervention in a space that has seen little regulation. It proposes systems where there were none. It talks about participation where decisions were once the big question is whether it does enough. For many parents, the answer may depend not just on the text of the law, but on how it plays out in classrooms, fee counters and committee court's ruling against Virender Rana is a timely reminder of the pressure many families face. The challenge for lawmakers now is to ensure that regulation means real relief, not just another layer of red tape.
