PR babus to call on Governor to clear air on BC quota hike
As the Telangana High Court deadline for conducting local body elections draws closer, uncertainty prevails over the fate of the 'Panchayat Raj Act (Amendment) Ordinance – 2018', which is yet to receive the Governor's assent. The ordinance seeks to amend Section 285-A of the Act to enable the implementation of 42 per cent reservations for BCs in local bodies. Sources indicate that Panchayat Raj department officials have sought an appointment with the Governor and are preparing to make a detailed presentation justifying the need for enhanced BC quotas. Higher officials intend to brief the Governor personally, highlighting the legal perspectives, the historical backwardness of BC communities, and the recommendations made by the BC Dedicated Commission. The objective is to address the Governor's concerns and convince him about the state's due diligence, including caste-wise enumeration and related safeguards undertaken to ensure constitutional validity.
It is also understood that the Governor recently sought legal advice on the draft ordinance and has reviewed how similar reservations were implemented in other states. However, no official decision has been communicated so far, leading to growing suspense and political speculation.
The state cabinet had earlier approved the ordinance to amend Section 285-A, which currently restricts reservations in local bodies to 50 per cent. To facilitate the proposed 42 per cent quota for BCs without breaching the overall reservation cap, the section required amendment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
Justice Yashwant Varma impeachment: Speaker Om Birla to announce inquiry panel to probe charges, says report
High court judge Yashwant Varma (File Photo) NEW DELHI: Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla is expected to announce the formation of a high-level inquiry committee to examine charges against Allahabad high court Judge Yashwant Varma, news agency PTI reported on Thursday quoting official sources. The move follows the submission of a notice signed by 152 Members of Parliament on July 21, calling for a probe into the grounds for Justice Varma's potential removal. The notice, now deemed the "property of the House," has triggered formal consultations to establish a three-member inquiry panel. According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, such a committee must include either the Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court judge, a Chief Justice of a high court, and a distinguished jurist. Sources confirmed that consultations are already underway, with Speaker Birla expected to write to the Chief Justice of India to recommend two of the committee members. The choice of the jurist, however, will rest solely with the Speaker. The Rajya Sabha is also involved in the process, as a similar notice signed by 63 opposition MPs was submitted to the Upper House on the same day. Consequently, coordination between both Houses has become crucial to the next steps. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Canada is Open for Professionals Seeking Relocation PR Canadiense Sign Up Undo Since the submission of the notices, senior leaders including home minister Amit Shah, Rajya Sabha leader of the house JP Nadda, Speaker Birla, and deputy Chairman Harivansh, who is currently presiding over the Upper House following Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar's resignation, have been in intense deliberations over the path ahead. Dhankhar, who had invoked the Judges (Inquiry) Act in the Rajya Sabha on Monday to clarify procedure, later resigned in a surprise move, citing health concerns. However, political observers believe his resignation followed discontent within the government over his decision to acknowledge the opposition-backed notice despite a bipartisan one already before the Lok Sabha. With Harivansh now temporarily in charge, the fate of the Rajya Sabha notice remains uncertain. 'We have not been told anything so far,' said an opposition MP who signed the notice. As per the Act, the three-member committee will examine the grounds for seeking the judge's removal and determine whether the charges warrant further action.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Plea in Supreme Court seeks political parties to comply with POSH law
A petition filed in the Supreme Court has sought a direction to political parties to comply with the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. The plea argues that political parties are covered by the ambit of the 2013 Act, therefore, bound to follow the procedures outlined in it. It said in 2024 the petitioner, Yogamaya MG, an advocate, filed a similar plea in the top court, which granted her the liberty to move the competent authority. The petitioner sent a representation to the Election Commission of India but has received no response till date, the plea added. Safe environment for women political workers Before the top court now, she sought directions to ensure a safe and inclusive work environment for women in political parties and holding political parties accountable to prevent and address sexual harassment. With Centre and political parties, including BJP and Congress added as respondents, the plea sought a direction to constitute a grievance redressal mechanism to tackle the menace of sexual harassment in line with the apex court's directions in the landmark Vishaka verdict and the 2013 Act. "This writ petition challenges the exclusion of female political workers from the ambit of protection under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act)," the plea filed through advocate Sriram P said. Vulnerability of women grassroot workers Despite the Act's progressive intent, the plea said, women political workers particularly at the grassroots remain vulnerable to sexual exploitation during campaigns and party work, with no effective legal remedy under the existing legislative framework. "Citing studies by UN Women (2013) and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (2016), which highlight widespread psychological and sexual harassment of women in political spaces, the petition underscores the urgent need for inclusion and protection of such workers under POSH," the plea said. The petitioner argued absence of rationale or intelligible differentia to exclude women in politics from protection available to women in other professions. Political party workers fit the definition of "employees" under the Act and the petition seeks to establish a clear framework for preventing and addressing sexual harassment within political parties, the petitioner said. The plea also sought a direction to political parties to constitute an internal complaints committee to address complaints of sexual harassment in adherence of the mandate of the 2013 Act.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Meghalaya High Court seeks response on challenge to Khasi Lineage Act
GUWAHATI A law that restricts the issuance of Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificates to individuals who adopt their father's or husband's surname has come under judicial scrutiny in matrilineal Meghalaya. On Wednesday (July 23, 2025), the High Court of Meghalaya sought a response from the State's Advocate General to a petition challenging certain provisions of the Khasi Hills Autonomous District (Khasi Social Custom of Lineage) Act, 1997, which aims to preserve the matrilineal structure of the Khasi community. The public interest litigation (PIL) was filed by Syngkhong Rymphei Thymmai, a group advocating reforms and a shift from the matrilineal to a patrilineal system. The group has questioned the legal validity of the restrictions imposed under the Act. The petition refers to an official letter issued by the State's Social Welfare Department on July 21, 2020, to the Deputy Commissioners of East and West Khasi Hills districts. The letter clarified that the Lineage Act did not prevent individuals from adopting surnames from either parent and permitted non-Khasi women to adopt their husband's surname. However, the department subsequently withdrew the letter on May 21, 2024. Following this, authorities allegedly began denying ST certificates to Khasi individuals who used their father's or husband's surname. The group contended that surname preference should not form the basis for denying an ST certificate, provided the applicant met the bloodline and lineage criteria under the Act, as amended in 2023. 'We do not think, at this stage, that for the disposal of the public interest litigation, affidavits are required. If affidavits are required at a later stage, we shall call for them, but in the interest of the Khasi community at large, this issue should be resolved as expeditiously as possible,' an order by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Indra Prasanna Mukerji and Justice Wanlura Diengdoh read. The court has listed the matter for further hearing on August 7.
