Yogi: Ensure land rights to 10,000 families in UP displaced from East Pak
Yogi Adityanath
on Monday directed officials to provide land ownership to over 10,000 families which were displaced from the then East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, between 1960 and 1975, and settled in and around Pilibhit, Lakhimpur, Bijnor and Rampur.
The CM said if land was not available, alternative plots should be provided to affected families. Officials said that though these families were settled for years and constructed homes, land had not been transferred to them legally for various reasons.
Calling this action a "national responsibility" and not just a matter of land transfer, the CM said, "This would be an opportunity to acknowledge the years of struggle these families went through after leaving their homes and moving to India to resettle."
"These families, which took refuge in India and have waited for rightful rehabilitation, must be treated with sensitivity and dignity. It is the moral responsibility of the govt," he said.
The CM said that with the repeal of the Govt Grants Act in 2018, it was necessary for the govt to explore alternate legal mechanisms to provide land rights to the resettled families. He directed officials to look for new provisions within existing laws to address these issues.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Harry Potter Actress Stuns Fans With Grown-up Pics
Cash Roadster
Undo
"This is not just a policy decision. It is a sensitive and historic step toward delivering justice to those displaced families which have lived in uncertainty for decades. This effort must be viewed through the lens of social justice, humanity and national responsibility. It is a chance to restore dignity to lives long overlooked," the CM said.
During a meeting on Monday, officials told the CM that between 1960 and 1975, thousands of families left the then East Pakistan due to communal violence and settled in Pilibhit, Lakhimpur Kheri, Bijnor and Rampur districts.
Once they left transit camps, these families were settled in these districts and provided agricultural land, but even now, most of them do not have legal ownership due to discrepancies in records and administrative delays.
"Although land has been allotted in several villages, various legal and administrative hurdles, including land being recorded under the forest department, incomplete transfer procedures, and a lack of physical possession, have prevented many families from receiving formal land rights.
In some areas, families from other states have also been resettled but continue to remain without legal ownership," an official informed the CM.
"In many villages, the displaced families have been cultivating land for years and have even constructed permanent homes, but their names are missing from official land records. There are cases of original allottees no longer residing in these areas. Additionally, in certain areas, individuals have taken possession of land without completing the necessary legal formalities, leading to complications," the official said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
Brazil files WTO request for consultation over US tariffs
Brazil's government has filed a request for consultations at the World Trade Organization over the tariffs imposed by the United States on goods from that country, it said in a statement on Wednesday. President Donald Trump slapped a 50% tariff on U.S. imports from Brazil, with many exemptions, in response to what he has called a "witch hunt" against his Brazilian ally, former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is on trial on charges of plotting a coup following his election loss in 2022. Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program Brazil had previously voiced plans to file the formal complaint at the WTO , even though that dispute settlement system has been stalled since the first Trump administration. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like We Have No Words For Dog The Bounty Hunter's Transformation Cash Roadster Undo Latin America's largest economy said the U.S. "flagrantly violates core commitments made to the WTO" by imposing the steep levies. "The Brazilian government reiterates its willingness to negotiate and hopes that the consultations will contribute to a solution to the issue," it added. Live Events
Time of India
30 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump's school discipline order faces state resistance and court intervention
A sharply worded directive from the Trump administration has triggered one of the most consequential clashes between federal authority and state education policy in recent memory. With a single 'Dear Colleague' letter and a follow-up executive order, the White House has sought to force schools across the country to abandon diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices, or risk losing federal funding. Half the country isn't buying it. What began as an advisory memo now stands at the center of a widening legal and political firestorm. Twenty-five states have rejected the administration's terms, and nineteen have taken it to court, challenging what they call an unconstitutional overreach of executive power. A federal injunction issued in April has momentarily paused the administration's efforts, but the ideological battle over how schools define and discipline, equity remains far from over. A directive masquerading as law Presidential administrations routinely issue guidance to public institutions, but the tone and content of Trump's February 2025 letter to federally funded schools were anything but routine. Calling DEI-infused disciplinary policies 'pervasive and repugnant,' the letter demanded that schools dismantle such programs within two weeks. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Is it better to shower in the morning or at night? Here's what a microbiologist says CNA Read More Undo The April executive order, titled 'Reinstating Commonsense School Discipline Policy,' gave the warning legal teeth, threatening funding cuts for any school out of compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yet legal scholars quickly noted a glaring anomaly: The administration had reinterpreted civil rights law to serve a political agenda, without defining what actually constitutes DEI. With no legal precedent, no public rulemaking, and no congressional mandate, the administration drew a line in the sand and dared the nation's schools to cross it. A full reversal of equity-oriented discipline Education departments under the Obama and Biden administrations had embraced equity frameworks, pushing for alternative discipline models that acknowledged the racial disparities embedded in traditional punitive systems. DEI-based methods such as restorative practices and student-teacher dialogue were championed for reducing suspensions and narrowing achievement gaps. The Trump administration has rejected that evidence wholesale. Rather than reforming school discipline, the new guidance frames DEI as a vehicle for reverse discrimination, particularly against white and Asian students. By collapsing a decade's worth of civil rights guidance into a single pejorative label, the administration has effectively criminalized a set of educational strategies that once had federal backing. States draw their battle lines As of May 30, 2025, the country stands divided: Twenty-three states, including Florida, Oklahoma, and Texas, certified their compliance with the Trump directive. Several legislatures went further, enacting state laws banning DEI across public schools. Twenty-five states, among them Massachusetts, Illinois, and California, refused to sign the letter, either on legal, moral, or logistical grounds. Nineteen of those states filed lawsuits against the federal government. The cases led to an April injunction that prevents the Department of Education from withholding funds, at least temporarily. Massachusetts' interim education commissioner, Patrick Tutwiler, captured the broader sentiment of resistance penned in an April 16 letter as reported by The Conversation: 'Massachusetts will continue to promote diversity in our schools because we know it improves outcomes for all of our kids.' Elsewhere, officials opted for coded defiance. Kansas education commissioner Randy Watson expressed support for Title VI compliance but avoided any reference to the Trump mandate. Kentucky acknowledged federal law while encouraging districts to continue DEI work. Mississippi, citing local control over districts, claimed compliance through a state DEI ban. Legal fault lines begin to crack Many states hinged their rebuttal on legal technicalities, and for good reason. Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination based on race, colour, or national origin, but it does not ban equity programming. States argued they had already certified compliance under existing law and had no obligation to do so again, especially not under pressure from a politically charged executive order. Connecticut's education commissioner, Charlene Russell-Tucker, noted that redefining Title VI would require an act of Congress, not an executive memo. Others leaned on the Paperwork Reduction Act, which bars the federal government from demanding redundant reports. The administration's failure to define DEI further weakens its legal footing. Without specificity, critics argue, the letter's guidance becomes a tool for arbitrary enforcement, exposing districts to ideological rather than legal scrutiny. Federal power tested like never before Never before has a president sought to condition federal K–12 funding on compliance with loosely defined political mandates. The threat has rattled superintendents, confused administrators, and mobilized legal experts — not to mention governors and state education commissioners — across ideological lines. While the April injunction has provided temporary relief, uncertainty prevails. The administration has not yet begun pulling funds from noncompliant districts, though the possibility still looms. Meanwhile, many states remain unsure whether to pause, modify, or double down on DEI-related programming. Education leaders say the broader implications are chilling. Beyond compliance: The future of public education Behind the legal arguments and political posturing lies a deeper question: What kind of education system does the country want? For schools that serve diverse populations, DEI isn't a trend, it's a necessity. The data shows that Black, Latino, and Native American students still face disproportionate disciplinary action. Ignoring those disparities under the guise of neutrality, critics argue, is a form of erasure. If the Trump administration succeeds in framing DEI as a violation of civil rights law, it may fundamentally alter the educational landscape, not only through budget cuts or lawsuits, but by erasing decades of progress in equity-oriented pedagogy. The fight is far from over. As courts deliberate, states dig in, and classrooms return to session, educators are left navigating a rapidly shifting terrain, where the stakes are as much about justice as they are about compliance. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump says he will pick a 'temp' replacement for Fed's Kugler in days
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday he would likely in the next two to three days nominate a candidate, out of a short-list of three, to serve the remaining months of a soon-to-be-vacant position on the Federal Reserve 's Board of Governors, leaving the choice of a permanent replacement for a later date. "We started the interviewing process," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, saying that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Vice President JD Vance were all involved. Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program "We have some great candidates. It's probably down to three," he said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Elegant New Scooters For Seniors In 2024: The Prices May Surprise You Mobility Scooter | Search Ads Learn More Undo Fed Governor Adriana Kugler last week unexpectedly announced she was leaving as of this Friday to return to Georgetown University, where she is a tenured professor. Her term had been set to expire on January 31, 2026. Kugler's resignation leaves an opening at the seven-member Fed Board led by Chair Jerome Powell, whom Trump has repeatedly criticized for not lowering interest rates . Live Events Each Fed governor and five of the 12 Fed bank presidents cast one of 12 votes on interest rates at each of eight meetings a year; at the most recent meeting on July 29-30 the vote, with Kugler absent, was 9-2 in favor of leaving the policy rate unchanged. Two candidates whom Trump mentioned on Wednesday -- former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh and current National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett - have both said they think Trump is right to push for lower rates. Trump did not identify the third candidate. On Wednesday Trump indicated the current Fed governor search would focus only on finding someone to serve out the remaining months of Kugler's term. "We're probably going to go with a temp and then a permanent, I think," Trump said. "So, the temp is going to be named, I'd say, in the next two, three days, and then we're going to go permanent." It is unclear how quickly a placeholder nominee would get into the position. TRUMP LOOKS TO WALL STREET Members of the Board of Governors are appointed to 14-year terms. Kugler herself, who has served since September 2023, had been appointed to fill the unexpired term of Lael Brainard. All nominees to the Fed require Senate confirmation - including a hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, a vote from that panel advancing the nomination and a series of floor votes before the full Senate, where Democrats have been slowing the pace of approval for Trump appointees. The Senate is currently on recess and doesn't return until September 2, when lawmakers will have plenty of competing demands, including a likely fight over a potential government shutdown. There are just four rate-setting meetings remaining in the unexpired portion of Kugler's term, with the first one on September 16-17. Trump said again on Wednesday that Bessent was not interested in the Fed job, and said the new governor nominee would have roots in Wall Street. "Essentially, we're all from Wall Street, aren't we?" he said. Trump has long sought to oust Powell, whom he had originally named as the Fed chief during his first term, or at least replace him when his term ends in May. Powell, unlike many of his predecessors at the Fed, does not hold a doctorate in economics, but holds a law degree and had worked as a lawyer and an investment banker in New York. On Tuesday, Trump said he had narrowed his search for a new Fed chair to four people, one of whom is thought to be current Fed Governor Christopher Waller.
