First time in 2 decades, EC holds revision of voters' list for bypolls
Election Commission
revised the voters' list of five constituencies for holding
assembly bypolls
there in a bid to ensure a "spotless" electoral roll.
The last time a special summary revision took place for a bypoll was in 2006 in Tamil Nadu, officials pointed out.
Citing provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, officials said the electoral roll is to be revised before every election and bypoll unless otherwise directed by the EC.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Play War Thunder now for free
War Thunder
Play Now
If the electoral roll is not revised, the validity or continued operation of the said electoral roll shall not be affected, they said, quoting the law.
The validity of the current electoral roll continues till the completion of the special revision.
Live Events
Officials underlined that it is for the commission to decide if revision of electoral rolls has to be conducted or not, depending on the requirement.
Bypolls to five assembly seats in four states will be held on June 19, the poll authority announced last month.
While two assembly
bypolls
will be held in Gujarat, one each will take place in Kerala, West Bengal and Punjab. The counting of votes will take place on June 23.
In Gujarat, the bypoll to the Kadi seat was necessitated following the death of sitting MLA Karsanbhai Punjabhai Solanki.
Another bypoll to the
Visavadar
seat in the state is taking place due to the resignation of sitting member Bhayani Bhupendrabhai Gandubhai.
In Kerala, the
Nilambur
seat will go to a bypoll since P V Anvar has resigned, while a bypoll will be held in Punjab's Ludhiana seat due to the death of sitting member Gurpreet Bassi Gogi.
A by-election to the
Kaliganj Assembly
seat in West Bengal has been necessitated due to the death of sitting assembly member Nasiruddin Ahamed.
Special Summary Revision is the legal term for revision of electoral rolls to weed out voters who have left the constituency or have died, and to add new names.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
No Epstein grand jury transcript unsealing: Judge rejects DOJ's request; testimony called ‘hearsay'
A federal judge in Manhattan has denied the US government's request to unseal grand jury transcripts related to the sex trafficking case against late financier Jeffrey Epstein , saying the records offer limited value compared to the wider case file already held by the department of justice, reported news agency AP. The ruling on Wednesday by US District Judge Richard Berman follows a similar decision by the judge who presided over the case of Ghislaine Maxwell , Epstein's former associate, who is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence after being convicted of aiding Epstein's abuse of underage girls. In his order, Berman noted that no victims testified before the grand jury and that the only witness was an FBI agent who had "no direct knowledge" of the alleged crimes. The agent's testimony, described as mostly hearsay, was presented over two sessions on June 18 and July 2, 2019, alongside a PowerPoint presentation and a call log - all of which will remain sealed. Berman wrote, 'the grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct,' adding that the motion to unseal the transcripts appeared to be a 'diversion' from the more comprehensive case materials already in the government's possession, as quoted by the agency. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The decision comes amid increased scrutiny over the DOJ's approach to transparency in the Epstein case. Last month, public backlash followed the justice department's statement that it would not release additional documents from the investigation. 'The government is the logical party to make comprehensive disclosure to the public of the Epstein file,' Berman said, criticising the limited nature of the records it sought to unseal. Meanwhile, Maxwell's legal team has indicated willingness to cooperate with the House Oversight Committee, which is seeking her testimony as part of a Republican-led probe. However, her lawyers have requested immunity and access to questions in advance, which the committee has rejected. Chair James Comer said the panel was willing to delay her deposition until after her Supreme Court appeal, expected to be resolved in late September.
Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
Explained: US Education Department's new public service loan rules and why taxpayers stand to benefit
Explained: US Education Department's new PSLF rules and why taxpayers benefit. (AI Image) The US Department of Education has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) introducing new regulations aimed at preventing the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) programme from providing benefits to borrowers whose employers engage in illegal activities. The proposed rules seek to ensure that taxpayer-funded loan forgiveness supports genuine public servants working for organisations that serve the public good, rather than those involved in unlawful conduct. These changes come after President Trump signed the Restoring Public Service Loan Forgiveness Executive Order, directing the Department to revise the PSLF programme and tighten the definition of qualifying employers. The new rules specifically exclude organisations engaged in activities with a 'substantial illegal purpose,' such as terrorism support, discrimination, immigration law violations, and child abuse, from being eligible employers for the PSLF scheme. New rules to protect taxpayers from improper loan forgiveness The Department's proposed regulations are designed to protect American taxpayers by stopping loan forgiveness benefits from flowing to employees of organisations undermining national security and American values through illegal means. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like TV providers are furious: this gadget gives you access to all channels Techno Mag Learn More Undo Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent stated that the Department is acting swiftly to ensure federal funds do not support unlawful conduct, aligning with the President's mandate to restore the PSLF programme to its original purpose. This NPRM follows an extensive process that included public feedback sessions and a negotiated rulemaking committee involving borrowers and education stakeholders. Two public hearings in May allowed for wide input, while the committee met in July to discuss and refine the qualifying employer definition. Although consensus was not fully reached—one committee member objected—the majority supported the changes. Exclusion criteria for qualifying employers The key feature of the proposed rules is the exclusion of organisations involved in illegal activities from the PSLF programme. Examples of activities that would disqualify employers include supporting terrorism, aiding or abetting discrimination, violating immigration laws, or engaging in child abuse. Such organisations would no longer be recognised as qualifying employers, thereby disqualifying their employees from receiving loan forgiveness benefits. Public comment period and next steps The Department of Education is accepting public comments on the proposed rules through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at Comments must be submitted by September 17, 2025, and submissions via fax or email will not be accepted. This period allows stakeholders and the public to contribute further before the regulations are finalised. Background and legislative requirements The proposed rules are issued under Section 492 of the Higher Education Act, which requires the Secretary of Education to seek public involvement when developing regulations for federally authorised programmes. The process includes negotiated rulemaking that brings together diverse stakeholders to recommend draft regulations. The current NPRM reflects this collaborative effort and aims to enhance the integrity of the PSLF programme. Overall, the Department's new rules aim to ensure that the Public Service Loan Forgiveness programme benefits only those working for organisations that genuinely provide public service, protecting taxpayers from subsidising unlawful activities. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump slaps sanctions on Canadian ICC judge in clash over US and Israel investigations
The Trump administration escalated its campaign against the International Criminal Court ( ICC ) on Wednesday(August 20), imposing sanctions on four officials, including a Canadian judge, over their roles in investigations targeting US personnel and Israeli leaders. The State Department said the measures freeze assets held in US jurisdictions and restrict financial transactions, the latest step under an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in February that authorizes penalties against ICC officials deemed to threaten American sovereignty. Canadian judge among those targeted by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Crossout 2.0: Supercharged Crossout Play Now Undo Among the sanctioned officials is Kimberly Prost, a Canadian national who has served on the ICC's Trial Division since 2018. According to the State Department, she was targeted for her ruling authorizing the court's investigation into alleged war crimes committed by US personnel in Afghanistan. Prost, a veteran jurist, previously worked as the United Nations Security Council's first Ombudsperson for its Al Qaida Sanctions Committee and spent nearly two decades with Canada's Department of Justice. Live Events Also sanctioned were French judge Nicolas Yann Guillou, who was part of the panel that issued arrest warrants last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Deputy Prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal, who upheld the Gaza-related warrants. Renewed offense against the ICC The decision reflects the administration's intensifying pushback against the ICC. Neither the US nor Israel is a member of the tribunal, and Washington argues the court has no authority over its nationals. 'The United States has been clear and steadfast in our opposition to the ICC's politicization, abuse of power, disregard for our national sovereignty, and illegitimate judicial overreach,' the State Department said in a statement. The administration has framed the sanctions as necessary to protect American service members and diplomats, as well as Israel, from what it considers politically motivated prosecutions. Echoes of Trump's first term The move mirrors the Trump administration's first-term clash with the court, when sanctions were imposed on then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and another senior official during probes into Afghanistan and Israel. Those measures were lifted by President Joe Biden in 2021, though his administration maintained opposition to ICC jurisdiction over non-member states. But Trump, who returned to office this year, has revived the hardline approach. The latest designations follow earlier sanctions in June against four other ICC judges. ICC and global response The ICC condemned the decision, calling it a direct assault on judicial independence. Israel welcomed the US decision. Netanyahu, facing the court's arrest warrant, praised the sanctions. Meanwhile, rights groups warned that the measures could hinder global accountability efforts. Domestic challenge The administration's aggressive stance is also facing domestic challenges. A federal judge in Washington blocked parts of Trump's executive order on constitutional grounds, ruling that restrictions on providing services to ICC officials infringed on free speech protections.
