Latest news with #Actof2017
Time of India
24-05-2025
- General
- Time of India
Display details of fee fixation panels: Edu dept to pvt schools
1 2 Ranchi: The district education department has asked all private schools in the city to prominently display the names and contact details of their fee fixation committees (FFC) and parent-teacher committees (PTC) on their premises. Schools have been told complete this display work during the ongoing summer vacation. This directive follows earlier instructions to all private schools to constitute both the FFCs and PTCs. Department officials said only 50 out of 150 schools have complied so far. "However, many of these schools did not make the details of the committees public, which is required," Badal Raj, the district superintendent of education (DSE), said. Raj said, "The step aims to empower parents by ensuring transparency in school administration, especially concerning fee structures. If a school increases its fees, parents can now raise concerns directly with the committee members. In addition to tuition fee hikes, parents can also file complaints related to increased charges in other categories." To address such issues, a district-level committee and a dedicated monitoring cell have been set up to act on any valid complaint. These measures align with the provisions of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal (Amendment) Act of 2017, which calls for the formation of fee-related committees at both the school and district levels to prevent irregularities. The department clarified that no private school can increase its fees, whether below or above 10%, without consensus between the FFCs and PTCs. If a school seeks to increase fees beyond 10 percent, it must obtain prior approval from the district-level committee. Additionally, a reminder will be issued to schools that have not yet formed the committees. If they fail to comply, a show-cause notice will be served to them. Principal of Kairali School, Rajesh Pillai, said, "We are using the summer vacation period to put up the committee names and contact numbers. The information will be displayed before the schools reopen." Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Brother's Day wishes , messages and quotes !
Hindustan Times
21-05-2025
- Health
- Hindustan Times
Mental Health Care Act, 2017: HC tells Punjab, Haryana to notify rules within sixty days
The high court (HC) has come down heavily on the failure of the Punjab and Haryana governments in framing rules for the implementation of mental health care law-- Mental Health Care Act, 2017. 'It is unfortunate to note that even after expiry of 7-8 years since promulgation of the Act of 2017, rules have not yet been notified even by both the states of Punjab and Haryana. Considering the fact that the Act of 2017 is a welfare legislation, both the states are obliged to frame the rules to give effect to various provisions of the Act,' the bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel observed when informed that both the states are yet to frame the rules. The court underlined that in the absence of framing of the rules by both governments, the Act of 2017 will not be able to achieve its objective for which it has been promulgated. 'Since much time has elapsed, this court directs both the states, especially the departments of health and family welfare, to ensure that rules be notified within a period of sixty days,' the court said while seeking a compliance report by July 24. The court was hearing a public interest litigation filed by Pushpanjali Trust, a welfare society seeking implementation of 2017 Act. During the hearing, petitioner Aditya Rametra of Chandigarh, in person provided points to be achieved by the implementation of the 2017 Act. He told the court that law provides for the availability of basic and emergency mental healthcare services at all community centres in the state, budgetary provisions for effective implementation, establishment of half-way homes and group homes, educational and training programs for the education of persons with mental illness.
Express Tribune
24-03-2025
- Express Tribune
Ex-IB chief's writ in benami case dismissed
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has dismissed a writ petition filed by a former IB director general, Brigadier (retd) Imtiaz Ahmed, against issuance of a show cause notice to him by the FBR for holding a benami house. The former IB chief was acquitted by an accountability court of the charges of having moveable and immovable properties beyond his known sources of income. However, later, the FBR served a notice on him under the Act of 2017 for keeping a precarious house under a front. IHC Judge Justice Muhammad Azam Khan in his order noted that both the offences are different in nature and under different statutes, as the offence under the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999 is pertaining to the property beyond his known source of income, while under the Act of 2017, the offence is distinct by being beneficiary for a benami transaction. "Since the offences are distinct, the petitioner's accusation in both cases do not constitute double jeopardy," said the order. Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar Advocate represented the FBR while FBR commissioner benami zone also argued before the IHC single-member bench. The judgement noted that the word "benami" means without a name, nameless or fictitious. Benami transaction is used to denote a transaction which is really done by a person without using his own name but in the name of another. "In the present case, the Impugned Notice was issued by the Respondent No 1 [FBR] to the Petitioner [ex-IB chief] under Section 22 (2) of the Act of 2017, to show cause regarding the Subject House and as to why such property should not be treated as a benami property. "A similar notice was issued to Respondent No2 (straw owner) wherein it was mentioned that upon inquiry from the CDA [Capital Development Authority], it was confirmed that the property was transferred in June, 1999 and the Subject House is still in his name. "The CDA also confirmed that the Respondent No2 has executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of the Petitioner [ex-IB chief]. The notice further reveals that the property has always been in beneficial use of the Petitioner and the rent proceeds of the Subject House were always collected in the form of cash by the petitioner." According to the notice, the tax declarations filed over the years showed a financial health that did not warrant purchase of such an expensive property and the straw owner became approver against Brigadier (retd) Imtiaz Ahmed in the proceedings initiated by the NAB. "The Respondent No2 [straw owner of the house] conceded the benami arrangement of purchase of this particular property among others," said the order. The order noted that the petitioner [ex-IB chief] should have contested the FBR notice by submitting a reply before the relevant authority under the Act of 2017the Adjudicating Authority/Adjudication Committee.
