Delhi CM orders immediate renovation of hostel at MAMC, speedy construction of new facilities for students, doctors
This comes after L-G VK Saxena and the Chief Minister last Thursday directed the Public Works Department (PWD) to immediately prepare a comprehensive plan to accommodate at least 4,000 students and doctors after observing that a hostel meant for 1,200 students has 3,200 students living at the hostel.
On Monday, Gupta held discussions on hostel renovation, campus safety, lighting, encroachment, and student welfare issues. CM ordered for LED street lighting to be installed across the campus, with 24×7 CCTV surveillance and heightened security presence.
She said that a special drive will be launched to remove illegal encroachments within the college campus.
During the meeting, students highlighted the poor condition of hostel walls and ceilings, which pose a risk to life and safety. The lack of adequate lighting during night hours also gives a sense of insecurity on the campus, they said.
Female students raised concerns over the shortage of security guards, insufficient facilities, and an unsafe environment. Encroachments within the campus were also reported as a daily obstacle for students.
Gupta stated that the seven hostels built between 1966 and 1990 were designed for only 1,200 students, while around 3,200 students are currently residing there in extremely cramped and substandard conditions with eight beds to a room, shared cupboards, and no provision for basic amenities like study tables.
The Chief Minister directed officials to submit progress reports every 15 days to ensure regular monitoring and accountability.
She also accused the previous Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government of negligence. 'I am shocked at the irresponsibility of the previous educated governments. It's appalling to see the poor state of such a prestigious institution like Maulana Azad Medical College and the condition of the students studying here,' she said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
Opposition motion in RS to oust Justice Varma was submitted, not admitted
NEW DELHI: The Lok Sabha will take up an all-party motion to remove Justice Yashwant Varma of Allahabad HC over the cash-in-house controversy. The opposition-sponsored notice for a similar motion in the Rajya Sabha hasn't been admitted. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now RS secretariat, after a mandatory scrutiny, didn't find it to be in "complete compliance with the procedure", sources said. Former Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar's move to allow the notice is believed to have caused unhappiness within the government. Now that it has been clarified that it was not admitted, it clears the way for LS Speaker Om Birla to choose three members of the probe panel, comprising CJI or an SC judge, an HC chief justice and a jurist, to probe the allegations of corruption against Varma. The RS chairperson would've had an equal say in the matter if RS secretariat ruled otherwise. All parties agree Varma ouster should be a joint call, says Rijiju The decision about Lok Sabha taking up the matter, announced by parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju, was followed by 152 members drawn from all political parties signing the motion. The issue is said to be at the core of former RS chairman and ex-Veep Jagdeep Dhankhar's abrupt resignation on Monday. Dhankhar had accepted the motion signed by 63 opposition members against Justice Yashwant Varma despite the decision at all-party meeting on Sunday that process for the removal of the judge should begin in the LS. Dhankhar's action of accepting opposition's notice is said to have set in motion a chain of events, murmurs of a "secret deal" and, crucially, a move by BJP-led coalition to signal their loss of trust in the Chairman, leading to his surprise exist on "health grounds". Rijiju reiterated Friday that there was a unanimous decision of all political parties to move for the removal of Varma, asserting that the Lok Sabha will take up the motion. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The minister said all political parties had agreed that the removal of Justice Varma should be a joint call, adding that the proceedings will be taken up in the Lok Sabha and then moved to the Rajya Sabha, in line with the Judges (Inquiry) Act. "We shouldn't remain in any doubt; proceedings will begin in the Lok Sabha," he said. Section 3, sub-section (2) of the Act says, "If notices of motions for removal of a Judge are given on the same day in both Houses of Parliament, no committee shall be constituted unless the motion has been admitted in both Houses, and where such motion has been admitted in both Houses, the committee shall be constituted jointly by the speaker and the chairman."
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Rajnath Singh to initiate debate on Operation Sindoor in Lok Sabha on Monday
NEW DELHI: Defence minister Rajnath Singh is set to initiate a discussion on Operation Sindoor in Lok Sabha on Monday while PM Narendra Modi is likely to intervene amid indications that he may use the much-anticipated debate to turn the heat on opposition, which wants to corner the government over alleged intelligence failures and US President Donald Trump's ceasefire claims. The first week of monsoon session of Parliament ended without much business with just one bill passed, parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju on Friday reiterated that govt was ready to discuss all issues including the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor. The day also witnessed a floor leaders' meeting with Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla after which his secretariat claimed that all parties agreed to ensure smooth functioning of Parliament next week when discussion on Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor will take place in both Houses for 16 hours each. However, a few opposition parties are still firm to continue with protests over SIR exercise, which Election Commission has now announced to carry out nationwide. Sources said Union home minister Amit Shah, external affairs minister S Jaishankar and BJP MPs Anurag Thakur and Nishikant Dubey are expected to take part in the discussion in Lok Sabha. PM Modi is expected to speak in both the Houses. Besides, Rajnath and Jaishankar will be among ministers who will also take part in the discussion in Rajya Sabha. TDP's Lavu Sri Krishnadevaraya and GM Harish Balayogi are expected to take part in discussion on Operation Sindoor in Lok Sabha. Sources said the party has been allotted 30 minutes. Samajwadi Party, its chief Akhilesh Yadav and MP Rajiv Rai will take part in the debate. Opposition parties have agreed to the agenda of taking up a special discussion on the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor on Monday in Lok Sabha and the next day in Rajya Sabha, brightening the prospect of normalcy returning to Parliament after the virtual washout of first-week proceedings. Rijiju blamed opposition for washout of the first week of monsoon session, accusing it of not allowing Parliament to function despite govt agreeing to its demand for a discussion on these issues right from the session's start. Asked about opposition's demand that Parliament discuss the special intensive revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, he said all issues cannot be taken up at once and govt will take a call on other matters gradually. With the electoral rolls revision exercise being seen in govt circles as Election Commission carrying out its mandate, the possibility of a discussion on the contentious issue is slim, sources said. Opposition has alleged that the drive is aimed at helping BJP-led alliance, which is in power in poll-bound Bihar as well. From the treasury benches, Speakers are likely to include its members who were part of the seven all-party delegations which had travelled to over 30 world capitals to convey India's robust stand against terrorism and Pakistan's role in abetting it.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Trump Birthright Order Blocked Again in Fresh Legal Setback
President Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship was blocked nationwide for the third time in less than a month, the latest sign that a US Supreme Court decision restricting 'universal injunctions' is having little impact on the dispute. The injunctions set up what is likely to be yet another set of appeals that could reach the Supreme Court, which has largely backed Trump in his broad crackdown on immigration. The justices haven't yet taken up the question of whether Trump's birthright citizenship order is constitutional. A federal judge in Boston ruled on Friday that an injunction pausing Trump's order nationwide is the only way to offer full protection to the Democratic-led states the filed the suit. The judge said his actions are in line with the Supreme Court's findings. US Judge Leo Sorokin said in his ruling that he could not narrow his injunction in part because Justice Department lawyers hadn't offered useful details about how such a ruling would work. 'With stakes this high, the court simply cannot adopt the defendants' blasé approach to the details and workability of a more limited injunction,' the judge said. A nationwide injunction protecting all affected babies was granted in a class-action suit in New Hampshire on July 10, while a federal appeals court this week upheld a similar block in a suit brought by four Democratic-led states. The new ruling comes in a suit brought by 18 states. A judge in a separate class-action suit is weighing another potential injunction. The Fight Over Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order: QuickTake Trump's order would restrict citizenship to babies with at least one parent who is a US citizen or green card holder. Critics say it violates a provision of the Constitution that grants citizenship to virtually every baby born in the US. The government says the directive closes a loophole that encourages illegal immigration. Trump's order was initially put on hold nationwide months ago in three separate cases. But the Supreme Court on June 27 paused those orders after ruling that judges generally can't issue nationwide injunctions that block federal policies outright. The justices returned the cases to the lower courts to weigh whether their injunctions needed to be narrowed or amended so that they provide relief only to the people or groups that sued. Sorokin held a hearing on the matter earlier this week. The Supreme Court's opinion, hailed as a major victory by the Trump administration, hasn't stopped judges from finding that broad injunctions against the president's birthright citizenship order are still necessary to protect US-born children of migrants while the cases proceed. In their request to maintain a nationwide injunction, the Democratic-led states said the Supreme Court's finding on so-called universal injunctions 'has no bearing on this case.' The states argue that a nationwide injunction is the only way to prevent harm that they say would be caused by allowing the executive order to take effect in some states, creating a chaotic patchwork of citizenship. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
