Latest news with #DKUpadhyaya
Hans India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Van Mahotsav 2025: Delhi launches massive tree plantation drive
New Delhi: In a major push towards environmental sustainability, the Delhi government has launched Van Mahotsav 2025, a large-scale tree plantation initiative that aims to make the capital greener and more pollution-free. The campaign, inspired by the emotional theme 'Ek Ped Maa Ke Naam', encourages citizens to plant trees in honor of their mothers. The launch event was held at 11 Willingdon Crescent, Rashtrapati Bhavan, where government officials, judicial leaders, and environmental experts came together to plant saplings and show their commitment to the cause. Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta announced that the city aims to plant over 70 lakh saplings in 2025, calling on residents to take part by planting trees at home, in schools, offices, and public spaces. 'This is not just a plantation drive, it's a movement to secure cleaner air and a healthier environment for future generations,' she said. She also highlighted that 'Ek Ped Maa Ke Naam' is a deeply personal initiative meant to strengthen the emotional bond between people and nature. The event saw participation from prominent judicial and environmental figures, including Delhi High Court judge DK Upadhyaya, NGT Chairperson Prakash Shrivastava, and other justices such as Naveen Chawla, Jyoti Singh, Anup Bhambhani, and Arun Tyagi. Also present were Delhi Environment Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa, NGT experts, and senior Forest Department officials. All attendees planted saplings as a symbolic gesture of support for the campaign. Justice Upadhyaya urged citizens to turn the initiative into a mass movement, while Justice Shrivastava described the campaign as a 'meaningful step' toward long-term environmental preservation. Environment Minister Sirsa praised the involvement of the judiciary and environmental institutions, stating that their participation sends a strong message of unity and collective responsibility. He noted that citizens across the city are actively participating, reflecting a growing public commitment to environmental protection.
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
PIOs are only those born in India before August 15, 1947, not after: Delhi High Court clarifies on MHA's appeal
The Delhi High Court on Monday held that an individual will be considered as a 'person of Indian origin' if they or either of their parents was born in India before August 15, 1947, and not those born in India on or after the cut-off date, unless they were born in a territory which became part of India after August 15, 1947. The ruling came on an appeal by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) that had challenged a single judge's order on its interpretation of 'person of Indian origin'. Setting aside the earlier observation, the division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that the single judge's finding is based on 'misreading of the provisions' of the Citizenship Act. In May last year, a single-judge bench of the Delhi High Court of Justice Prathiba Singh had directed the Centre to grant Indian citizenship to a 'stateless' 17-year-old girl – Rachita Francis Xavier – who was born in India to an Indian-origin US citizen couple. At the time of the girl's birth, the couple were residing in India and were Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders. Justice Singh had held that she would not qualify as an 'illegal migrant' and would be considered as a 'person of Indian origin' as her mother was born in independent India, in Andhra Pradesh in July 1958. The division bench, relying on a Supreme Court verdict, however clarified that as per the Citizenship Act, a person is to be considered of 'Indian origin' if they or either of their parents was born in India before August 15, 1947, or in a territory which became part of India after August 15, 1947 (for example Goa, Sikkim). It held that a person born in India on or after August 15, 1947, will not qualify as a 'person of Indian origin'. Under the Citizenship Act, 1955, 'persons of Indian origin' can be granted Indian citizenship subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions. While the MHA had in July 2024 granted Indian citizenship to the girl, Rachita Francis Xavier, it however, moved an appeal in December 2024, challenging the single judge's 'views' on 'illegal migrant' and 'person of Indian-origin', arguing that the interpretations 'may open floodgates for many other illegal migrants in seeking Indian citizenship' and 'would have a cascading effect and would dilute the spirit of the Citizenship Act, 1955.' The ministry was not challenging the grant of citizenship to the girl but only the view that the single judge had taken on the question of 'illegal migrant' and 'PIO'. The division bench — acceding to the MHA's appeal and setting aside the interpretation by the single judge of 'person of Indian origin' – recorded in its order, '…in our opinion,…any person shall be deemed to be a person of 'Indian Origin' if the person or either of his parents were born in undivided India… It would thus mean that to acquire the status of a person of 'Indian Origin', the person concerned or either of his parents would have been born in India before 15.08.1947 and not thereafter.' 'A person who was born in a territory which became part of India after 15.08.1947, will also be deemed to be a person of 'Indian Origin'…(It) would not cover a person to be deemed to be of 'Indian Origin' if he or either of his parents was born in India on or after 15.08.1947 or in a territory which did not become part of India after 15.08.1947,' it added. Voicing its 'unambiguous opinion' that Justice Singh's observation in the case that the girl qualifies to be a 'person of 'Indian Origin' is erroneous', the bench set it aside. The single judge had reasoned that the girl was born in India and had never gone out of India, which the MHA countered in its appeal, saying that section 2(1)(b) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 clearly defines 'illegal migrant' which would include a child born in India and devoid of any valid travel documents. The single judge had relied on the fact that the term 'migrant' envisages movement from one country to another, of a foreigner.
New Indian Express
5 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Delhi HC slams school rebuilding delay
NEW DELHI: How can a school run without classrooms and only with facilities like a boundary wall, toilet block, and drinking water space alone, the Delhi HC asked, expressing dismay at the authorities for their inaction in rebuilding an MCD-run primary school in Khirki Village. The court's remark came after it was informed that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) had granted permission for repair and renovation of existing facilities like a porta cabin, toilet block, boundary wall, and water space—but not for the construction of classrooms. 'It is beyond comprehension as to how a school can run without classrooms and only with the facilities of boundary wall, toilet block and drinking water space alone,' said a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela in a July 2 order, adding that the school 'will require classrooms as well.' The school, which shares a wall with the Tomb of Yusuf Qattal, was constructed in 1949 to educate local children. It was demolished in 2012, and 350 students were shifted to another MCD school. ASI had objected to reconstruction without a no-objection certificate, citing the protected status of the tomb. A petition filed by the Khirki Village Residents Welfare Association was earlier disposed of last year after the court directed ASI to decide on MCD's application for reconstruction 'in accordance with law… preferably within six weeks.' But no progress has been made, the court noted.
NDTV
5 days ago
- Politics
- NDTV
Judge In Cash Row Goes To Top Court Over Ex-Chief Justice's Impeachment Plan
New Delhi: Allahabad High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma, who is at the centre of a controversy over the alleged recovery of a huge amount of cash at his official bungalow in New Delhi earlier this year, has challenged an in-house inquiry report by a Supreme Court-constituted committee that recommended initiation of his impeachment. The development came days before the Monsoon session of Parliament, during which the Centre was likely to introduce the impeachment motion against the High Court judge. In a writ petition in the top court, Mr Varma challenged the suggestion made by former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, and accused the three-member panel that was set up on the latter's order of drawing adverse conclusions without giving him a full and fair hearing, sources said. The High Court judge also alleged that the committee failed to investigate the basic facts, especially those related to the alleged recovery of cash on March 14 that is necessary to establish his conviction. He said that even if the cash was found in the outhouse, further investigation is needed to establish ownership, authenticity and other facts, the sources added. The cash was allegedly found following a fire at Justice Varma's Lutyens Delhi residence at around 11.35 pm on March 14, prompting the fofficials to rush to the spot and douse it. The discovery led to several steps, including a preliminary inquiry by Delhi High Court Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and taking away judicial work from Justice Varma in the Delhi High Court. On March 24, the Supreme Court collegium recommended the repatriation of Justice Varma to his parent High Court. Two days earlier, then CJI Khanna constituted the committee to conduct an in-house inquiry into allegations and decided to upload on the top court website the inquiry report of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya of the Delhi High Court. It included photos and videos of the alleged discovery of a huge stash of cash. Justice Varma denounced any insinuation and said no cash was ever placed in the storeroom either by him or any of his family members. Last month, the ex-CJI wrote to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi over the panel's report. Last month, top government sources said a motion seeking Justice Varma's removal would be brought in the Monsoon session. Cross-party consensus would be crucial, given the constitutional threshold required for the removal (impeachment) of a judge, the sources added. The Monsoon session of Parliament is scheduled to begin on July 21. Only a handful of judges have ever faced removal proceedings in the country's history - most have resigned before the motion could be carried to conclusion.
Time of India
5 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Seek nod to construct classrooms in school in Khirki: HC to MCD
New Delhi: Wondering how a school can operate without classrooms, and only with a boundary wall, toilet block and drinking water, Delhi High Court has ordered Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to take immediate corrective steps. It also directed the civic body to seek necessary permissions from Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for the construction of the classrooms. HC's observation came while dealing with the case of a corporation-run primary school in Khirki village, which shares a wall with the tomb of Yusuf Qattal, a Sufi saint. "If the school is to run, it will require classrooms as well, apart from the facilities for which permission for repair/renovation has been granted. It is beyond comprehension as to how a school can run without classrooms and only with the facilities of a boundary wall, toilet block and drinking water space alone," a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi The court was hearing a plea in relation to the school, which was constructed in 1949 and shared a wall with the tomb. The counsel for the petitioner, Khirki Village Residents Welfare Association, submitted that after a span of 60 years, they felt it was necessary for the school to be reconstructed, as the population of Khirki village and adjoining areas had increased. "We gather an impression that the authorities, both of ASI and MCD, do not appear to be serious in getting the sanction for reconstruction/repair of the school being run by the civic body," HC noted, adding it was "astonished" that an order passed by this court, which was to be complied with within six weeks, still remained to be enforced. "It is beyond our comprehension as to how the authorities are acting in this manner, both those of MCD and ASI, risking initiation of contempt proceedings. Such a situation cannot be approved of by the court," it said after being informed that ASI had granted permission for the repair/renovation of existing structures — porta cabin, boundary wall, toilet block and drinking water space at the school. However, the counsel for the petitioner pointed out that it does not include any permission for the construction of classrooms. HC then directed MCD to move an application seeking the requisite permission of ASI for the construction of the classrooms. It added that if such a proposal is made, it should be considered by the authorities, keeping in mind the necessity of running the school, which cannot be granted without the classes.
