Erode Corporation's proposal to hike water and sewerage charges cancelled amid stiff opposition
The meeting, chaired by Mayor S. Nagarathinam, was held in the presence of Corporation Commissioner Arpit Jain and Deputy Mayor V. Selvaraj.
Raising the issue of poor waste management, Ward 43 councillor J. Saburama Minhaj cited a report by a private organisation that ranked Erode as the second dirtiest city in the country due to garbage accumulation. She questioned the steps the civic body has taken to address the issue.
Leader of the Opposition and Ward 11 councillor S.D. Thangamuthu demanded that agenda items 1 and 2 — the Water Supply By-laws 2025 and Underground Sewerage By-laws 2025 — be cancelled. 'We have been insisting on this in the last two council meetings. Yet, the items have been brought again,' he said, before announcing a walkout. All six AIADMK councillors left the meeting hall.
DMK councillors, joined by Congress and Independent members, also demanded the cancellation of the two proposals and criticised the Corporation for reintroducing them despite their repeated opposition. Amid the ruckus, the Corporation announced the cancellation of both agenda items.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
33 minutes ago
- NDTV
"He Dreamt Of Building Us A Home": Chennai Teen's SUV Murder Sparks Outrage
Chennai: A cloud of grief and unanswered questions hangs heavy over the home of 19-year-old Nithin Sai, a final-year BA English student, who was killed after a high-speed luxury SUV rammed a bike he was riding pillion on. The act, police say, was intentionally done, prompting them to file a murder case. The incident, police say, stemmed from a college rivalry over a relationship, has snowballed into a political and social flashpoint. At his home, Nithin's parents, Muthozhi and Suresh, are inconsolable. "He dreamt of becoming an officer and building us a house," his mother told NDTV. "But now we are left only with his memories. The investigation was slow. Police initially called it just an accident. They filed a murder case only after our protests." Nithin was allegedly killed when a group of college students, riding in a Range Rover, rammed their vehicle into his bike. The police have arrested three students, including one identified as the grandson of a DMK councillor. A fourth suspect is still missing. The victim's friend, Badri, who was with him that day, said the group had gathered to celebrate a friend's birthday when they received an SOS from juniors about a brewing fight. "There was an argument between Venkatesh and Pranav over a girl," Badri said. "First, they hit our bikes. Stones were thrown at the Range Rover. We all sped on our bikes. The vehicle then chased Nithin and Abhi and rammed their bike. Nithin died. Abhi was injured. The real target was Venkatesh, who was on another bike." Nithin's family alleges that two of the accused -- Chandru and Pranav -- come from politically influential families linked to the ruling DMK. "Chandru is known for rowdyism. He should not be roaming free. If they do this now, imagine in the years to come. No one should go through what I do now," said Muthozhi. While the police have now registered a murder case, the family and friends are demanding a thorough and unbiased probe. The DMK has pushed back against the political narrative. Senior party leader TKS Elangovan told NDTV, "These are social issues. AIADMK and BJP workers have also been involved in such incidents. But now they want to target the DMK government. This isn't about politics."
NDTV
an hour ago
- NDTV
Tamil Nadu Barred From Using Names Of Living Leaders For State Schemes
Chennai: The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government to refrain from naming welfare schemes after living political personalities or using photographs of former Chief Ministers or ideological leaders in government publicity material. The court's ruling came in response to a public interest litigation filed by AIADMK MP CV Shanmugam. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan, cited Supreme Court directives and content guidelines for government advertisements. The judges ruled that while the use of the incumbent Chief Minister's photograph -- MK Stalin -- is permitted as per the top court's 2016 clarification, including images of late leaders or party insignia such as flags or emblems is prima facie impermissible. The court also barred the use of any living political leader's name in the nomenclature of government schemes. Recently, the Tamil Nadu government had launched an outreach programme "UNGALUDAN STALIN" or 'Stalin With You', incorporating the Chief Minister's name. The state government had also scheduled to launch a similarly named health programme tomorrow. Petitioner CV Shanmugam, represented by Senior Counsel Vijay Narayan, argued that the state was misusing public funds to promote political personalities by embedding their identities into welfare schemes. He contended this violated the Supreme Court's rulings in the Common Cause cases and the Government Advertisement (Content Regulation) Guidelines, 2014. While the state government denied the claims-stating that the cited pamphlets were unauthentic and not officially, the court held that any such material containing politically symbolic visuals would violate legal norms. Importantly, the High Court clarified it was not stopping the government from implementing welfare schemes, only the manner in which they are publicised. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on August 13.
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
Madras High Court restrains T.N. government from naming new schemes after living personalities
The Madras High Court has restrained the Tamil Nadu government from using the name of any living personality in the nomenclature of new or re-branded public schemes to be introduced in the future. It has also prohibited the use of portraits of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) insignia/emblem/flag in the advertisements issued for popularising those schemes. First Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan passed the interim order on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) Member of Parliament Shanmugam against the use of Chief Minister M.K. Stalin's name in the public outreach programme, 'Ungaludan Stalin.' Making it clear that the they had not passed any order against the launch, implementation, or operation of any welfare scheme of the government, the judges said, their order was confined only to the nomenclature of such schemes and the publicity materials to be prepared by the government. They also said that the interim orders were being passed only on the basis of prima facie materials. The judges ordered notices to the Tamil Nadu government as well as the DMK on the main PIL petition filed against the nomenclature of 'Ungaludan Stalin' scheme, and granted time for them to file their counter affidavits. The Bench decided to hear the MP's PIL petition, along with a similar case filed by another individual, next on August 13 after the filing of counter affidavits and rejoinders. In the meantime, since senior counsel Vijay Narayan, assisted by K. Gowtham Kumar, representing the MP, claimed that the State government was planning to name a few other public schemes too after living personalities; the Division Bench said, such nomenclature prima facie appeared to be impermissible as per the orders passed by the Supreme Court in the famous Common Cause case. 'Therefore, we are inclined to pass an interim order to the effect that while launching and operating government welfare schemes through various advertisements, the name of any living personality, photograph of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or party insignia/emblem/flag of Respondent number 4 (DMK) shall not be included,' the interim order of the Bench read. The judges further clarified that the pendency of the present PIL petition before the High Court would preclude the Election Commission of India (ECI) from taking an appropriate decision on a representation made by the AIADMK MP seeking necessary action against the DMK under paragraph 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.
