Devendra Fadnavis Calls Up Uddhav Thackeray, Sharad Pawar To Seek Support For NDA Nominee For VP Elections
This comes after the INDIA bloc's Vice-Presidential nominee and former Supreme Court judge B Sudershan Reddy on Thursday filed his nomination papers for the upcoming VP election, describing the moment as an honour and pledging to discharge the role with impartiality, dignity, and a steadfast commitment, if elected.
Reddy filed the nomination in the presence of Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Congress Parliamentary Party chairperson Sonia Gandhi, and Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi. In a statement released after filing his nomination, Justice (Retd.) Reddy said, "Today, I had the honour of filing my nomination papers for the office of the Vice President of India as a joint candidate of the Opposition parties. I did so with a deep sense of humility, responsibility, and unwavering commitment to the values enshrined in our Constitution."
Add Zee News as a Preferred Source
The election for the Vice President of India will see a direct contest between Justice Reddy, backed by the INDIA bloc, and NDA's nominee C P Radhakrishnan. NDA's candidate CP Radhakrishnan on Wednesday filed his nomination papers for the Vice Presidential elections in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Union Ministers Amit Shah, Rajnath Singh, Nitin Gadkari, JP Nadda, Kiren Rijiju and Arjun Ram Meghwal were also present at the occasion.
Radhakrishnan filed his nomination in the presence of about 20 proposers and 20 supporters. The election for the Vice President of India will see a direct contest between Justice Reddy, backed by the INDIA bloc, and NDA's nominee C P Radhakrishnan.
The last date for filing nominations is today, while candidates can withdraw their nominations until August 25. The Vice Presidential post fell vacant after Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned on the first day of the Monsoon Session of Parliament on July 21, citing health reasons. The VP is elected by an electoral college, which consists of MPs from both houses of Parliament. The elections of the Vice President are governed by the provisions under Articles 64 and 68 of the Constitution. The Election Commission notifies the VP polls by the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952.
As per Article 66(1) of the Constitution of India, the election of the Vice President shall be held by the system of proportional representation by means of single transferable vote, and the voting at such election shall be by secret ballot. The post of Vice President fell vacant after Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned on July 21, the first day of the Monsoon Session of Parliament, citing health reasons.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
13 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Solution to Governor withholding Bills political, not judicial: SG to SC
The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre if a Governor has unlimited power to withhold a Bill for time immemorial, then what is the safeguard for a duly elected legislature. The remarks came as Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Centre repeatedly underlined before a five-judge Constitution bench, hearing President Droupadi Murmu's reference on the question whether the court can impose timelines for Governors and President to deal with Bills passed by state Assemblies, that the judiciary too needs to respect the separation of powers and that solution to such problems lay in the political sphere. The hearing saw sharp exchanges, with the SC bench questioning Governor withholding Bills indefinitely and the Centre pushing back reminding the court that the top judiciary had opposed setting time limit for trial courts or giving any foothold to the executive in judicial appointments by striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. 'Suppose a legislature, which is elected by a two-thirds majority unanimously passes a Bill… Then if he (Governor) doesn't exercise the proviso, it will make the legislature totally defunct,' Chief Justice of India B R Gavai presiding over the bench observed. The bench also included Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar. To the CJI's comment, SG Mehta said: 'Your Lordship's concern is a concern, but the answer is this forum is not the solution. Solution is… amendment of the Constitution and till that happens, the political process… Every state does not take such a confrontational position. They too exercise their diplomatic solutions… they persuade, discuss, debate… and ultimately the problem gets solved. Your Lordships are not flooded with state governments saying Bills are pending.' He said the judiciary's penchant to intervene in the matter 'necessarily presupposes a belief that ultimately we will have to solve every problem'. The senior law officer went on to quote celebrated American judge Benjamin N. Cardazo, saying, 'The judge even when he is free is not a knight-errant, roaming at will in pursuit of his own ideal of beauty and goodness.' Mehta explained that the knight errant was an allusion to a 'speaking of a fictional character roaming around trying to correct everything he felt was wrong about society'. He said, 'Even if the Governor sits on the Bill, the solution does not lie here but in the political sphere. There are all political cases. Such instances do happen and are solved through the democratic process. It is wrong to believe that there can be circumstances where every other organ would fail and therefore the only other organ would be this organ… There are certain problems which are not solvable by the judiciary. They are to be solved by a political democratic process. When such a thing happens, we have to expect and accept that there are constitutional functionaries who are responsible and responsive because they are answerable to the people everyday and at least every five years.' The CJI, however, said 'Governor is not answerable to anyone'. Disagreeing, Mehta said, 'Governor is the most vulnerable office… When Governor sits over a Bill, for good reasons, bad reasons, no reason, whatever, then the political process takes over. Governor can be called back… Why should we not trust other constitutional functionaries? It is a matter of the Chief Minister talking to the other constitutional functionaries that we are facing a constitutional problem.' 'Whenever something happens in the judiciary, the system takes care of it. There is an inbuilt system and every problem does not come on the judicial side. Your Lordship takes a decision on the administrative side.' Justice Narasimha said the judiciary not taking up the state's complaint when the Governor withholds a Bill for long may lead to a logjam. Mehta said, 'Every logjam may not have a solution with the judiciary… There are several problems which will have to be sorted out as per the constitutionally prescribed democratic political process and the court would hold its hands saying it's non-justiciable…' The CJI then asked: What then happens to the will of the two-thirds majority of the state? Mehta said, 'I do not like the way I am going to answer. But suppose a citizen approaches the President saying my trial is pending since 10 years and the sessions judge is not taking up the matter and my offence is punishable with only 7 years imprisonment…can inaction on part of the judiciary empower the President to declare him having already undergone the sentence?' 'Some problems the solution can come from only within the system. That is the doctrine of separation of powers… The moment the executive tried to step in the judicial domain, Your lordships have restricted… on the ground or separation of powers. That is how NJAC went. The NJAC was declared illegal… It was passed unanimously, but your Lordships protected the separation of powers… It will have to be a two-way street. Some issues are non-justiciable.'
Deccan Herald
an hour ago
- Deccan Herald
Sweeping powers and the morality ruse
The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill and associated bills that were tabled in Parliament on Wednesday violate the principles that underlie the Constitution and the democratic polity. These bills are ill-conceived and are liable to be unfairly implemented. They seek to punish a person before the crime is proved, as they provide for the removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and ministers from office if they are arrested or detained in custody for 30 consecutive days for offences that attract a jail term of at least five years. The bills have been sent to a joint committee of parliament which is to return them before the next session so that they can be enacted at the in public office is important but it cannot be pursued by circumventing due process. The bills, if enacted, will become another weapon in the hands of the Central government to target Opposition parties and their ministers. Central investigative agencies, including the CBI and the ED, are now being used to hound politicians in the Opposition camp. At present, the law and its existing processes provide them cover but the proposed laws can remove all defences, exposing anyone to politically motivated, vindictive detention. These will be the new Article 356, without its safeguards and procedures, enabling the Central government to destabilise state governments. The bills are out of tune with the essential norms of parliamentary democracy and deal a blow to constitutional federalism. They challenge the separation of powers between the organs of state and give executive agencies unfettered power to dismiss elected government has sought to justify the bills on the ground of public interest and the need for elected representatives to be honest and above suspicion. But going by the Narendra Modi government's record, these ethical and moral arguments would be mere excuses for targeted actions against the opponents. Long-drawn legal processes and low rates of conviction may have prompted the government to explore quicker ways to get at its political opponents. The bills are not aimed at cleansing the political system but at weakening the Opposition. They are unlikely to pass the judicial muster, even if they get parliamentary approval, because they go against the basic tenet of the rule of law that no one can be held guilty till proven otherwise. The resignation of people holding office is a political matter between them, their parties, and the people. The law should have no role to play until they are proven guilty.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Under fire for misconduct with women, MLA Mamkootathil quits Youth Cong post
Pathanamthitta/Thiruvananthapuram: Congress MLA Rahul Mamkootathil on Thursday quit as Youth Congress state president following allegations of misbehaviour with women from various quarters. The Palakkad MLA announced his decision at his residence in Adoor, shortly after opposition leader V D Satheesan said the party would address such serious allegations without any compromise. Young actor Rini Ann George had on Wednesday alleged that a "young leader of a prominent political party" sent her obscene messages and invited her to a five-star hotel. She stopped short of naming the person but dropped enough hints. However, on Thursday, screenshots of social media chats and voice clips purportedly featuring Mamkootathil appeared on TV channels and social media. Mamkootathil said he decided to quit the post on his own. "At a time when the state govt is facing severe protests and allegations, Congress leaders and party workers should not waste their time and energy on such matters. Hence, I have decided to resign from the post of Youth Congress president. 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 I still believe that I have not committed any illegal act," he said. The MLA said he had spoken to the opposition leader, besides KPCC and AICC leaders. "They did not demand my resignation. The actress is my friend, and I don't believe the person she mentioned was me. She is my good friend and will remain so. I believe that I have not done anything against the law or the Constitution until now," he said, adding that he was not aware of the actor complaining to Satheesan about him. On an audio clip released by a Malayalam news channel alleging that he forced a woman to terminate a pregnancy, Mamkootathil said anyone could create such clips in this era. "I will reply when any complaint is filed. Till now, no such complaint exists," he said. Earlier in the day, writer Honey Bhaskaran alleged on social media that Mamkootathil chatted with her on Instagram and later made derogatory remarks about her. On this, he said he also saw the post but no evidence was provided. "Let her prove her allegation. If there is anything illegal, a complaint should be given. If two people indulging in a conversation is illegal, then she is also guilty. I am ready to face action if I am found guilty," he said. Similar allegations were raised against him when he was chosen as Youth Congress president and during the Palakkad byelection, he added. Indirectly welcoming Mamkootathil's decision, Rini said in Kochi that she was only seeking a behavioural correction among politicians. Without naming the person, she said: "Parties should take such corrective measures against such people." On the "friendship" claim, she said she had blocked the person on social media and they no longer communicated. Earlier, Satheesan told reporters in Thiruvananthapuram that anyone found guilty of such misbehaviour would not be spared. "The woman who raised the allegation should not be dragged into a controversy. She is like a daughter to me. If someone in Congress committed a serious offence, the party will handle it strictly. No matter how prominent the leader is, action will be taken. I will personally ensure this," he said. He said the party had not received any complaint so far. "No one has approached me with a personal complaint. If they did, action would be taken. A serious complaint has emerged now, and action will be taken. The party will investigate and act accordingly," he said. Meanwhile, protests broke out in parts of the state demanding the MLA's resignation. BJP and Mahila Morcha members marched to his office in Palakkad with live roosters. CPM and DYFI members also protested in Palakkad. Protests were also staged outside the MLA's residence in Adoor and offices of Satheesan. Mamkootathil had won the Palakkad byelection in Nov last year with a margin of 18,724 votes. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
