Latest news with #SLPs
Time of India
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Denied higher pension, retirees' association pleads CJI to intervene
Nagpur: Alleging grave injustice to lakhs of retired persons, Employees Pension (EPS-1995) Coordination Committee has written to Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai seeking his intervention after a Supreme Court bench dismissed a key petition filed by Powergrid Retired Employees' Association related to EPS-95. The committee claimed the Supreme Court verdict has denied rightful pension benefits to senior citizens who retired before September 1, 2014. In a letter dated May 20, the committee's national general secretary Prakash Pathak and national legal advisor Dada Tukaram Zode have demanded "sympathetic intervention" from the CJI, citing "arbitrary and unjust treatment" by a Supreme Court bench, which, they alleged, failed to address core grievance regarding misinterpretation of earlier apex court orders. "For the first time since 2004, we are not getting justice from the top court," said Pathak, referring to a decades long legal struggle to secure higher pension based on actual salary. "Till 2016, 10 special leave petitions (SLPs) filed by Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) were rejected. But since 2019, the trend has reversed against the pensioners." The letter points to Kerala high court's 2018 verdict, which held EPFO's pension scheme amendments illegal — a decision later upheld by the apex court in April 2019. However, the committee alleged that subsequent review petitions and SLPs filed by the EPFO and the Centre were processed in an "inconsistent" manner, with fresh benches taking up matters already decided by three-judge benches. The association particularly flagged a paragraph — 44(v) — in the November 4, 2022 judgment by the top court. "The EPFO later misused this paragraph to issue circulars dated December 29, 2022, and January 25, 2023, which effectively excluded pre-2014 retirees from the benefit of higher pension, triggering around 77 subsequent legal applications — all of which were dismissed," said the association. "This pension scheme is meant for social welfare and security in the old age of workers. The court should protect such right to life," the letter reads. It also claims that dismissal of Powergrid staffers plea was done "without considering facts and merits," causing distress to elderly pensioners across the country. The committee has also enclosed a copy of an earlier letter addressed to the apex court, expressing dismay over the verdict. Seeking urgent remedial action, the committee has requested the CJI to examine the case for fairness and consider an appropriate inquiry "in the interest of justice to pensioners across the country."
Hans India
19-05-2025
- Health
- Hans India
The role of speech and language pathologists
Speech and Language Pathologists (SLPs) play a crucial yet often underappreciated role in supporting communication and cognitive development across all age groups. Whether working in hospitals, clinics, schools, or rehabilitation centers, these highly trained professionals are dedicated to helping individuals overcome communication and swallowing challenges that can significantly impact quality of life. SLPs work with a wide range of people—from children with developmental delays and speech sound disorders to adults recovering from strokes, brain injuries, or managing conditions such as Parkinson's disease and dementia. They also support individuals with hearing loss, fluency disorders like stuttering, and voice impairments. In educational settings, SLPs collaborate with teachers and parents to help children develop language skills essential for academic success and social interaction. A large part of their work involves personalised assessment and the development of targeted intervention plans. For children, this may involve improving articulation, expanding vocabulary, or fostering language comprehension. For adults, therapy often focuses on restoring lost communication abilities or learning new strategies for effective speech and language use. SLPs are also critical in addressing swallowing disorders (dysphagia), ensuring that individuals can eat and drink safely—particularly important in healthcare and elderly care settings. Their expertise spans the mechanics of speech production, cognitive-linguistic functions, and even alternative communication methods, such as using devices for those who cannot speak. As communication is a foundational skill for daily living, learning, and connecting with others, the impact of SLPs is profound. They empower individuals to express themselves, build confidence, and engage more fully with the world around them. In doing so, Speech and Language Pathologists not only restore voices—but also rebuild lives.
United News of India
08-05-2025
- Politics
- United News of India
SC tags Partha Chatterjee's bail plea with co-accused in West Bengal's cash-for-jobs scam
New Delhi, May 8 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Wednesday tagged the bail application of former West Bengal minister and Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader, Partha Chatterjee, with a pending matter involving a co-accused in the high-profile multi-crore West Bengal's cash-for-jobs scam, while scheduling the next hearing for July 17. Appearing for Chatterjee, the counsel submitted that the trial had stalled and opposed the separation of his client's proceedings from those of the co-accused. 'He is bedridden and cannot even walk,' the lawyer argued, emphasising Chatterjee's deteriorating health condition. However, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S V Raju strongly opposed the plea, stating, 'He was a minister, this is a serious case. He is neck-deep in corruption. Genuine candidates were denied jobs while only those who paid were recruited.' He further said that a hospital was favouring high-profile accused and that the former minister was medically fit. The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sanjiv Khanna, questioned the delay in listing the bail matter, asking, 'Why is the bail matter posted for July?' The ASG replied by citing the involvement of multiple co-accused and the gravity of the charges, including misuse of official position and corruption. The court noted that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by a co-accused against the same Calcutta High Court orders dated November 20 and December 24, 2023, was already scheduled for July 2025. Consequently, the apex court directed that Chatterjee's petition be tagged with the existing matter and heard jointly on July 17, 2025. In a significant procedural directive, the bench also ordered the Chief Secretary of West Bengal to take a decision on sanctioning prosecution against the co-accused within two weeks, emphasising that neither the State nor the co-accused were parties before the Court at this stage. 'We have not expressed any opinion on merits but directed the needful to ensure the facilitation of trial,' the court observed. During the hearing, Justice Khanna expressed concern over inconsistent and verbose rulings in bail matters from the High Courts. 'In bail matters, High Courts are writing lengthy judgments and delivering divergent views? What is happening, Mr Raju?' he questioned. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the bench also directed the Supreme Court Registry to tag any future SLPs filed against the same High Court orders with the present case. The cash-for-jobs scam continues to draw national attention due to its political ramifications, with multiple leaders and bureaucrats under investigation for alleged recruitment irregularities in West Bengal's public sector hiring process. UNI SNG SS
Indian Express
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Opinion The burden of submitting criminal past of the accused shouldn't be on individuals
The Supreme Court in a recent order (Munnesh v State of Uttar Pradesh) asserted that criminal antecedents should be disclosed compulsorily in any Special Leave Petition (SLP) seeking bail. The Court highlighted how bail applications are being filed (increasingly so) without disclosing the criminal antecedents of the person seeking bail. The order further directed that any person who is seeking bail in the apex court must mandatorily disclose, in the synopsis of the petition, if they have knowledge of their involvement in any criminal case. Another aspect that has been brought to the fore by the Court is that the SLPs, which lack these puzzle pieces, are often completed by the state through their counter-affidavits. The above order reflects how oblivious courts are to the ground reality. It can be exceptionally difficult for a person behind bars to know their criminal antecedents or the stage of their pendency. For instance, in the recent case involving Kunal Kamra, there were five FIRs registered — four of them were lodged in Khar police station, and one was in Dombivli. Now, it is easier for a public figure like Kamra to know that there are five FIRs lodged against him, but the same cannot be said for a person who doesn't have such resources at his disposal. Take, for example, cases where the bail applications are filed by the family or the pairokar of the person in jail. These family members who genuinely do not possess any information about the criminal history of their relative, pass on to their lawyers this 'hollow information', resulting in a bail application having no mention of the criminal antecedents, which, as per the above order, will lead to a dismissal of the bail application. What is important for the courts to realise is that a citizen cannot be burdened with the responsibility to find out the details of all the cases registered against him while behind bars. It is also unfair to shift this responsibility upon his family members or pairokar. The courts now have the right to dismiss such applications without having to distinguish false disclosure from genuine incapacity to know one's criminal history. This mandate of disclosing one's history is not wrong per se, but the burden for this should be cast on the state, not the other way around. It is the state that can reveal an entire list of cases, if any, against a person. The precedent being set by the Supreme Court flies in the face of the principle of 'bail is the rule and jail the exception'. Also Read | SC must reconsider timeline for the President According to a report by the National Crime Records Bureau published in 2015, the majority of under-trial prisoners are illiterate or semi-illiterate. They require major resources and additional support to understand the court process. The new order further complicates this process for them. Lord Russell of Killowen, Chief Justice, in his address to the grand jury at Salisbury Assizes in 1899, said: '….it was the duty of the Magistrate to admit accused persons to bail, wherever practicable, unless there were strong grounds for supposing that such persons would not appear to take their trial. It was not the poorer classes who did not appear, for their circumstances were such as to tie them to the place where they carried on their work. They had not the golden wings with which to fly from justice.' This unawareness cannot be put in the same box as being ignorant of the law. Interestingly, in the above-mentioned order it is apparent that the Court was apprised about the criminal history of the applicant only after the state pointed out the same in their counter affidavit. A step towards placing the burden of such a responsibility on the state would help in the functioning of the courts and those behind bars.
New Indian Express
30-04-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
Rs 5,832 crore beach sand-mining 'scam' in TN: SC stays CBI probe
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday, in an interim order, stayed the A two-judge bench of the apex court, comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan, passed the interim decision, staying the High Court order and directing all parties to maintain the status quo in the case. "We direct the parties to maintain status quo. We also stay the Madras HC order for a CBI probe," the court said. On February 17 this year, the Madras High Court had ordered the CBI to investigate the role of unknown public servants and directed the transfer of mineral stocks to Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL)—a move that is now on hold. The top court passed the interim order after hearing multiple Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) filed by one of the affected parties, V V Mineral, challenging the Madras HC's directive for a CBI probe. Senior advocates Siddharth Agarwal, Mukul Rohatgi, and Dhruv Mehta appeared for V V Mineral in the apex court and sought a direction for maintaining the status quo and staying the CBI investigation. During the course of the hearing, the court also dispensed with the service of notice for certain respondents, including Indian Rare Earths Limited and others. In the same case, the Tamil Nadu government, represented by senior advocates Arvind P Datar and N R Elango, had filed a caveat petition to ensure that the state government's arguments and submissions would be heard before any order or judgment is passed by the top court. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the probe agency in this case, had recently conducted raids on April 5, 2025, across 12 locations in Tamil Nadu. The CBI alleged illegal mining of rare minerals like monazite, pointing to a nexus between private firms, politicians, and government officials. While allowing the plea of V V Mineral, which sought a stay on the CBI probe and departmental inquiries, the Supreme Court also issued notice to the respondents and directed all parties to maintain the status quo regarding the Madras HC order passed on February 17, 2025.
