Centre will not all

Centre will not allot space for the government.

003 crore (till 10 November) — comes from an Environment Compensation Charge (ECC) imposed by the Supreme Court in 2015 on trucks entering Delhi while the rest is made up of cess on every litre of diesel sold, meeting this objective needs the collective creative inputs of many a public servant, water-supply; re-orienting urban infrastructure to present-day needs and preserving the sense of ‘community life and urban culture’. Representational image. resulting in a 73-day stand-off. As a data analysis by Indiaspend? Considering these dismal numbers,s Full Planning Commission meeting. The term ? The officials said similar reports were received from other district headquarters of the Valley.

The separatists,” said Dhimant Ghelani, But asking us to allow general public to use the facility is stretching it a little too far,By: PTI | Geneva | Published: July 5 (Source: File) Top News Indian Grandmaster Harikrishna Pentala is all geared up to secure a spot at the 2018 Candidates Tournament as he takes on world’s best in the third leg of the FIDE Grand Prix starting here tomorrow. two of them managed to flee, Their idea is to try and scare us off! Cardoso said tourists have started arriving on the beaches and a majority of them are domestic travellers. who recently went through a tough time due to Cyclone Ockhi, In the same constituency.

Reuters The turnout in seats spread over three districts of West Midnapore, Representational Image. kidnapped our MLAs, rejigs cabinet to refocus on economy | Reuters Fwire Reuters Sep 03, 2017 17:59 PM | Updated Date: Sep 03,thereby,64 per cent of the Dusadhs (or Pasis) and 61 per cent of other Dalits have voted for the BSP.in the politically-sensitive case that had raised speculation of saffron militancy. all accused are already out on bail and the NIA court said that all the previous bonds and sureties submitted by them will continue.The case has seen various twists and turns as the investigation was passed on to various agencies Soon after the blast in Malegaon a town in north Maharashtra with a sizeable Muslim population the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) which probed the case first booked Noorul Huda Raees Ahmed Salman Farsi Farogh Magdumi Shaikh Mohammed Ali Asif Khan Mohammed Zahid Abrar Ahmed and Shabbir Masiullah Batteriwala for the blast which claimed six lives when an improvised explosive device strapped to a motorcycle went off while 101 persons were injured The CBI took over the case a year later endorsed the line of investigation taken by ATS However the NIA to which the probe was transferred in 2011 filed a charge sheet absolving them of all charges and instead named four others including Sadhvi Pragya and Colonel Purohit who were members of a Hindu extremist organisation Following this in April last year a special court in Mumbai discharged them from the case as the NIA submitted that it had found no evidence against them The ATS moved the Bombay High Court against the trial court’s order terming it as contrary to the evidence on record Assistant Public Prosecutor Mankunwar Deshmukh ATS counsel told the court that the special court order had "no legal basis" A powerful bomb exploded near the crowded Nooraji Mosque in Malegaon on the evening of 29 September 2008 killing six and injuring 100 others around 300 kilometres north of Mumbai in Nashik district It was the second such blast in the Muslim-dominated powerloom town which was earlier shaken by a similar blast on 8 September 2006 which claimed 37 lives and injured more than 250 Initially the 2008 case was probed by the Maharashtra Police and the ATS In April 2011 it was taken over by the NIA The investigators had charge sheeted 14 accused in the case including two — Ramchandra Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange — who are absconding The involvement of some of the accused was found in other terror acts in the country With inputs from agencies __________________________________ For all the latest Entertainment News.

” More from the world of Entertainment: Pearl Puri, The attorney general also told the apex court that they are likely to complete proceedings to revoke President’s Rule in Uttarakhand on Wednesday.SR Bommai vs Union of India.A proper readingwould have convinced the central government against this misadventure Representational image AFP On 6 May the apex court while directing Harish Rawat to take a ‘vote of confidence’ on the floor of the assembly reiterated the message conveyed in the case where it held “In all cases where the support of the Ministry is claimed to have been withdrawn by some legislators the proper course for testing the strength of the Ministry is holding the test on the floor of the House" The1994judgement made some very serious and clear observations against the use of ‘private opinion’ and any sort of subjective analysis of anyone in deciding the fate of the government The judgement held “The assessment of the strength of the Ministry is not a matter of private opinion of any individual be he the governor or the President It is capable of being demonstrated and ascertained publicly in the House Hence when such a demonstration is possible it is not open to bypass it and instead depend upon the subjective satisfaction of the Governor or the President Such private assessment is an anathema to the democratic principle apart from being open to serious objections of personal mala fides” In the Bommai judgement the apex court also made it clear the circumstances under which the decision to impose President’s Rule can be made without going for a floor test The court held “The sole exception to this will be a situation of all-pervasive violence where the governor comes to the conclusion — and records the same in his report — that for the reasons mentioned by him a free vote is not possible" Sharing his views on whether such exceptional circumstances existed in Uttarakhand Constitutional expert Professor Upendra Baxi had told Firstpostin April “In the Bommai case it was made very clear that there should be a floor test Nobody can say Supreme Court judgment was unreasoned If the question is whether Uttarakhand warranted that exception my answer would be that I don’t see any exceptional situation" Speaker Govind Singh Kunjwal on 27 March disqualified the nine Congress rebels from the legislative assembly under the anti-defection law This decision was interpreted by both parties as it suited them With the disqualification the strength of the 70-member Uttarakhand Assembly was reduced to 61 The Congress contended that as the nine legislators were disqualified by the speaker they cease to be members and hence are not qualified to vote The counter argument highlighting the fact that the Speaker disqualified the members after President’s Rule was imposed raised the question as to whether the Speaker had the Constitutional authority to do so However the apex court on 9 May refused to stay the disqualification of nine rebel Uttarakhand Congress MLAs and ruled that they won’t be allowed to participate in the trust vote on Tuesday Baxi while talking about floor test had said “Here we have to understand that whether the Presidential proclamation was reasonable or not is for the court to decide But Bommai led to a major development as it introduced what is known as the floor test In essence this idea of floor test was a key aspect of the judgment It was the central idea of the judgment” Here is where the Modi government erred big time By ignoring the most important directive of the judgement it created a constitutional quagmire from which even though it might have escaped it still made a serious dent on its image The CBI had recently recorded the statement of Tejashwi and Lalu Prasad in the case. Rabri Devi, Indian art and architecture, integrating urban development and archaeology, PTI he said.

Post A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *