Move to retain e-pass is well thought out: CM

Move to retain e-pass is well thought out: CM

Bosco.Dominique@timesgroup.com

Cuddalore: 28.08.2020

Chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami on Thursday said the e-pass system is necessary to monitor the movement of people in the present pandemic scenario and to prevent the spread of Covid-19 in the state.

A few days ago, the Centre directed states and Union territories to abolish the e-pass system for inter-state and intra-state travel. Tamil Nadu brought in relaxations to epass issuance instead.

“The government issues epass to all those who apply for it. But people must apply only in case of emergencies and for absolutely necessary reasons. E-pass will help in contact tracing and test and treat all of them. It (continuing e-pass system) is a decision taken after careful consideration and discussion with experts. Covid-19 is a deadly disease, it is a matter of life and death. Several people have lost their lives to the infection,” Palaniswami said while speaking to reporters.

He was in Cuddalore on Thursday to review the pandemic situation and healthcare infrastructure.

The CM said the government will decide on several relaxation measures, including reopening places of worship in the state, during the meeting of district collectors on August 29.

He said the government’s stand is to hold the National Eligibility and Entrance Test (Neet) only after the infection is brought under control. “I had written to the Prime Minister on July 8 requesting him not to hold Neet until the infection is controlled. Our health minister has also written to the Union health and family welfare minister about it,” he said.

TN only state to bag investments after Covid struck: EPS

Nagapattinam:

Tamil Nadu was the only state in the country to attract investments even during the Covid-19 period, CM Edappadi K Palaniswami said in Nagapattinam on Thursday. As a result, the state’s gross domestic product is at 8% against the countr y’s GDP of 4%, he said. He was speaking at a meeting with farmers, industrialists and self-help group members while reviewing Covid-19 preventive measures. “We are creating more jobs by attracting investments. When the GDP rate is remaining 4% in the country, it stands at 8% in Tamil Nadu”, the chief minister said. TNN

Justice Lakshmanan, ex-judge of SC & prolific writer, dead at 78

1942-2020

Justice Lakshmanan, ex-judge of SC & prolific writer, dead at 78

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Chennai: 28.08.2020

Former Supreme Court judge and chairperson of law commission of India Justice A R Lakshmanan passed away on Wednesday in a private hospital in Trichy. He was 78.

Juctice Lakshmanan’s wife Meenakshi Aachi also died in Trichy just three days ago. He is survived by sons A R L Arunachalam and A R L Sundaresan, a designated senior counsel, and daughters Umayal and Saravanavalli.

Justice Lakshmanan, who was also a prolific writer and author of several books in English and Tamil, was born in Devakottai. He started his career as an advocate in 1968.

In 1990, Justice Lakshmanan was appointed a judge of the Madras high court. During the J Jayalalithaa regime, a false ganja case was slapped on Justice Lakshmanan’s son-in-law, kicking up a nationwide row.

In 1997, he was transferred to the Kerala high court and later made the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan high court and then to the Andhra Pradesh high court. In December 2002, he was elevated to a judge of the Supreme Court, where he served till March 21, 2007.

“As a judge, he had delivered more than 1.3 lakh judgments, many of them landmark ones,” said senior advocate and former additional solicitor-general of India M Ravindran.

Around 9pm on Wednesday, Justice Lakshmanan was rushed to a private hospital in Trichy following cardiac complaints. According to hospital sources, his vital signs were weak when he was brought to the hospital. A few hours into hospitalisation, his health deteriorated, and he died.

His body was taken to his house at Devakottai. Later, the mortal remains were cremated at a crematorium near Virusuzhi river in Devakottai on Thursday afternoon.

CM Edappadi K Palaniswami on Thursday expressed anguish over the former judge’s death. “The death of justice Lakshmanan has caused an irreparable loss to Tamil Nadu and to the field of judiciary,” he said, hailing the excellent work of Justice Lakshmanan when he was secretary of Madras Bar Association and later as chairman of National Law Commission. Lakshmanan was a member of the Supreme Court’s empowered committee to resolve Mullaperiyar dispute.

The chief minister extended his deepest condolences and sympathies to the family and the legal fraternity.

City couple loses ₹4L, gets ₹55L in fake notes as loan

City couple loses ₹4L, gets ₹55L in fake notes as loan

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

28.08.2020

A Chennai-based couple was duped of ₹4 lakh by a man from Avinashi near Tirupur, who had promised to arrange them a loan of ₹1 crore.

The man escaped with ₹4 lakh cash received from the couple as ‘documentation charges’ in exchange of arranging a tranche of the loan amount of ₹1 crore, which eventually turned out to be fake currency.

Police said Alwin Rai, a resident of Perumalpuram extension in Tambaram in Chennai, wanted to expand his truck transport business and was looking for a loan. His wife Jennifer was told by one of her friend, Kiruba, about an advertisement in a newspaper that promised financial assistance for business purposes.

Jennifer contacted the mobile number in the advertisement. The person who spoke to her gave her the contact number of one Acharya, and asked her to approach him for loan.

“As per the complaint, Acharya agreed to arrange a loan of ₹1 crore, but said the document charges would amount to ₹4 lakh, which needed to be paid upfront. He also asked Alwin Rai to come to Avinashi on August 26,’’ said a police officer. Acharya had told the couple that he would give ₹55 lakh in person and the remaining would be transferred online.

Accordingly, the couple reached Avinashi on Wednesday and met Acharya at a hotel near the national highway on the outskirts of the town. The couple gave ₹4 lakh cash to Acharya, who then handed them a briefcase which, he said, had ₹55 lakh cash, the first tranche of the loan.

After he left the place, the couple opened the briefcase and to their shock, found that the notes were fake.

It was then that the couple realised that it was a racket to dupe them of ₹4 lakh given as documentation charges. The police have booked a case and have launched a hunt for Acharya. Police suspect that there is a bigger gang operating the racket.

One of the fake currency notes given to the Chennai-based couple by the deceiver

Acharya agreed to arrange a loan of ₹1 crore, but said the document charges would amount to ₹4 lakh, which needed to be paid upfront. He also asked Alwin Rai to come to Avinashi on August 26, police said

[Breaking] Students vs UGC : SC To Pronounce Judgment Tomorrow On Pleas Against Final Semester Exams

 [Breaking] Students vs UGC : SC To Pronounce Judgment Tomorrow On Pleas Against Final Semester Exams

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

27 Aug 2020 7:03 PM

The Supreme Court will pronounce verdict tomorrow in a batch of petitions which challenged the direction issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) on July 6 to hold final semester examinations by September 30.

A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and M R Shah had reserved the judgment on August 18, after elaborately hearing various parties in the case.

The main arguments from the students' side are :

Compelling students to appear for physical exams when the COVID-19 pandemic is intensifying exposes them to serious health risks, affecting their right to life.

The uniform direction issued by the UGC without taking into account local situations will put several students to grave prejudice, as several areas are containment zones and local lockdown is in prevalence in many regions.

The pandemic and the lockdown have disrupted the classes, and conducting exams without requisite number of classess is arbitrary and unreasonable.

There are many students of final semester who have either cleared job interviews or secured admission for higher courses. So granting them degree certificates at the earliest based on past performance is the best course available to protect the future of the students.

The option of online exams is also not viable given the stark digital divide, and the lack of uniform access to the internet across the spectrum.

Examination is not the only mode of evaluation. UGC follows the concept of 'continuous evaluation' of the student from day 1. Hence, internal assessments and performance of past semesters can be reckoned to award final degrees.

The UGC stated that the direction was issued in the best interests of the students. The Ministry of Home Affairs told the Court that it has given an exemption for opening educational institutions for the purpose of conducting exams.

Disaster Management Act vs UGC Act

The case also threw up the issue of conflict between Disaster Managment Act and the UGC Act. This was in the context of the State of Maharashtra acting on the decision of the State Disaster Management Authority to direct the cancellation of final term exams. Hence, an issue arose in the case as to whose directions will prevail - whether that of the SDMA or the UGC.

The UGC maintained that in matters related to higher education, it remains the final word and the SDMA cannot interfere in that domain. On the other hand, the State of Maharashtra submitted that in the backdrop of COVID-19 pandemic, which has been notified as a 'disaster' within the meaning of the DMA, the State Disaster Management Authority posseses vast powers to take appropriate decisions to deal with the situation to protect the lives of people.

State Autonomy

Another crucial issue in the case was whether State Governments possess autonomy in the matter. The Governments of the National Capital Territoriy of Delhi, West Bengal, Odisha, Maharashtra etc, have issued directions to cancel final term exams. Therefore, the question was whether UGC can override the State Governments in that regard.

It was argued by the State Governments that the UGC has only the power to lay down standards or education and cannot issue peremptory directions to universities. It was further argued that the UGC can only lay down guidelines, that too after consulting the Universities as per Section 12 of the UGC Act. The States contended that the UGC took the decision without consulting them and without taking account of the local situations.

Senior Advocates Dr AM Singhvi (for petitioner Yash Dubey), Syam Divan(for petitioner Yuva Sena), Arvind P Datar (for Maharashtra), K V Vishwanathan (for Delhi), Jaideep Gupta (for West Bengal), Advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava(for petitioners), Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (for UGC) etc made arguments in the case.

Reports about various submissions in the hearing may be read below :

How Can There Be Exams Without Teaching? UGC Directions Arbitrary': Singvhi Seeks Cancellation Of Exams

'When Exams Can't Be Held In April With 1137 COVID-19 Cases, How Can They Be Held Now With Lakhs Of Cases?' Shyam Divan Tells SC In Students v UGC

[Students vs UGC] UGC Cannot Compel That Exams Be Held; Can Only Lay Down Standards: Datar For Maharashtra In SC

[Students vs UGC] Impossible To Hold Exams In Bengal; UGC Hasn't Taken Into Account Ground Realities: Jaideep Gupta Tells SC

[Students vs UGC] Poor, Downtrodden And Those Without Access To Technology Will Be Hard Hit: Vishwanathan Tells SC For Delhi Govt

[Students vs UGC] Universities Cannot Confer Degrees Without Exams; UGC Directions In Students' Interests: Solicitor General Tells SC

Breaking] UGC final year exams: Supreme Court to pronounce its judgment tomorrow in petitions seeking cancellation of exams

Breaking] UGC final year exams: Supreme Court to pronounce its judgment tomorrow in petitions seeking cancellation of exams

The UGC guidelines require universities to conclude their final year examinations by September 30, amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Shruti Mahajan

Aug 27, 2020, 7:07 PM IST

The Supreme Court will tomorrow pronounce its judgment in a batch of petitions challenging the revised guidelines of the University Grants Commission (UGC) mandating the conduct of final year exams by September 30.

On August 18, the Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subshash Reddy, and MR Shah had reserved its judgment in the matter after a detailed hearing spanning over two days.

SC hears pleas challenging UGC Guidelines mandating final year University exams by September 30 [LIVE UPDATES]

In its revised guidelines, the UGC has mandated that all final year exams be conducted amid the COVID-19 pandemic, while following the Standard Operating Procedure.

However, in the wake of the consistently worsening situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, some state governments had already cancelled university exams, while asking universities to consider adopting an alternative marking system.

The UGC's guidelines prompted not just students, but also teachers' associations and youth wings of political parties to the Supreme Court.

Before the Court, the power of the UGC to lay down a direction of this nature while overriding the provisions of the Disaster Management Act was called into question. Another question that was put before the Court was whether state governments can declare against holding of exams when it is the UGC which is empowered to confer degrees on students.

A host of Senior Counsel including Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Shyam Divan, and Arvind Datar argued in favour of the interests of the students. They pointed out that the decision taken by some state governments to cancel the exams was only on account of the COVID-19 figures. Under normal circumstances, a deferment or cancellation of exams would not be stipulated.

Singhvi said that the UGC's initial guidelines displayed an element of sensitivity and flexibility. However, the same was completely absent in its revised guidelines which fixed a deadline of September 30 without taking into consideration the ground situation in different places.

He also questioned the UGC's rationale behind refusing to hold exams in April when the COVID-19 pandemic was still at its nascent stages.

Divan argued that Union Ministry of Home Affairs guidelines direct for educational institutions to be closed and that the guidelines may be made stricter by the states if required, but cannot be diluted. The holding of exams would essentially lead to the dilution of these guidelines, Divan said.

"The supreme irony is that the guidelines talk about the rising COVID-19 cases", and 10 other arguments made during the UGC case before SC

Datar explained to the Court the availability of option to adopt an alternative marking system as per the UGC's provisions.

Senior Advocates KV Vishwanathan and Jaideep Gupta raised pertinent points as regards disparity in access to resources for students to give the exams in online mode. Datar also added that the students with special needs have been left out of consideration.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the UGC is not equipped to confer degrees without exams and the decision to conduct exams has been taken keeping in view the interests of the students, many of whom have applied for jobs and further studies.

Mehta argued that the guidelines have a statutory mandate and that they are mandatory in nature. States do not have the power to unilaterally decide that exams will be cancelled, considering it is the UGC that has the governing power in this domain, Mehta submitted.

The Supreme Court, after concluding the arguments in the case, had directed the parties to submit their written submissions if any, and had reserved the judgment on August 18.

[Breaking] Students vs UGC : SC To Pronounce Judgment Tomorrow On Pleas Against Final Semester Exams

[Breaking] Students vs UGC : SC To Pronounce Judgment Tomorrow On Pleas Against Final Semester Exams: The Supreme Court will pronounce verdict tomorrow in a batch of petitions which challenged

2 IGMC students suspended for ragging, abuse

2 IGMC students suspended for ragging, abuse

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Shimla: 27.08.2020

The police have registered a case against two students of the Indira Gandhi Medical College (IGMC), Shimla for allegedly ragging a third-year MBBS student. The accused senior students were also suspended after a decision to this effect was taken at a meeting of the Anti-Ragging Committee of the medical college on Wednesday.

In his complaint to the police, the third-year student has alleged that the two seniors in inebriated condition manhandled him near the hostel gate and the entire incident was recorded in the CCTV cameras installed there. The complainant also accused his seniors of ragging him.

Sources said that the CCTV footage shows two groups of students clashing with each other during the night hours. The Anti-Ragging Committee has submitted its report to the Shimla police, who are investigating the matter.

Shimla SP Mohit Chawla said based on the student’s complaint, a case under sections 323 (causing hurt on provocation) and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the IPC and Section 3 of the Himachal Pradesh Education Institutions Prohibition of Ragging Act has been registered at the Sadar police station.

He said the police are investigating the matter and a report has been sought from the principal of the college. As of now, a prima facie FIR has been registered on the complaint of the aggrieved MBBS student and his medical examination has been conducted.

IGMC principal Dr Rajnish Pathania said both senior students, against whom allegations have been made, have been suspended from the medical college. He said the action came on the basis of the report submitted by the Anti-Ragging Committee.