Bharat Mata row: Kerala minister Bindu accuses Kerala University VC of misusing powers in registrar's suspension
She also claimed that VC had gone beyond his powers in suspending the registrar. The minister said the registrar had not violated any rule by cancelling the programme for displaying a picture of 'Bharat Mata', which was a religious symbol used by the RSS, at the venue.
Also Read: Bharat Mata row: Kerala University V-C suspends Registrar, sparks political row and legal showdown
The minister alleged that it was the Governor who violated the rules by attending a programme cancelled by the registrar of the university. The Governor was also trying to infiltrate the RSS symbol into the Raj Bhavan, she charged. The state General Education Minister V. Sivankutty also strongly criticised the VC, accusing him of "acting like a goon" of the Governor.
Also Read: Bharat Mata row: Kerala Raj Bhavan expresses displeasure over 'security lapse' during SFI-DYFI marches
'It was not the registrar, but the Governor who showed disrespect to the statutes of the university by attending a programme cancelled by the registrar,' Sivankutty said. Mr. Sivankutty said the powers of the Governor were limited under the Constitution. Even the Supreme Court had recently suggested that Governors should not exceed their authority, he said. The minister alleged that the practice of using Governors for challenging governments that did not get along with the Centre has become a custom only after the BJP assumed power.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
Court cannot punish B for A's mistake: Counsel on HC order nixing 32k primary teachers' appts
Kolkata: Senior counsel Anindya Mitra challenged the 2023 Calcutta High Court order by Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay annulling services of 32,000 primary school teachers and argued that a court of law cannot cancel appointments of people not made parties in a case because that would constitute a violation of the principles of natural justice. Arguing before a division bench of the Calcutta HC on Thursday, Mitra said, "The petitioners who moved the single bench didn't even make such a prayer." The senior counsel restricted his arguments to the 2016 selection of primary teachers that concluded in 2017 and distinguished it from the 2014 Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). Mitra argued that the writ petition was moved five years after the selection process had concluded and pointed out that the petitioners did not make any allegations of illegality. "The basis of the illegality recorded in the judgement was the judge's own, based on irrelevant considerations. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata Counsel submitted that the judge in the case made references to allegations of corruption against ministers, MLAs and the former president of the West Bengal Board of Primary Education, describing the selection process as the "biggest scam" in Bengal's education system. "A minister or an MLA or a former president might have been arrested for doing something wrong. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo But for an offence committed by A, you cannot punish B," Mitra said. He submitted that the judge made these observations in relation to the 2014 TET and not the 2016 selection process by the Board. The senior counsel drew the division bench's attention to the part of the single bench judgement stating: "the sense of justice is above the sense of law" and argued that such a conclusion goes against the basic framework of the Constitution and rule of law. The counsel pointed out that the judge, while taking on an investigation on his own, had questioned candidates from only four of 20 districts and made a generalised observation on aptitude tests, when nine among those questioned had said that aptitude tests were held. Mitra cited SC judgements to substantiate that a court cannot generalise issues. He further pointed out from the records that the judge had initially ordered the cancellation of 36,000 teachers. "He made changes to his order, calling it a typographical error. Is this believable?"
The Hindu
44 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Suspension of Kerala University Registrar draws flak
A day after Kerala University Vice Chancellor-in-charge Mohanan Kunnummal suspended Registrar K.S. Anil Kumar over the Bharat Mata portrait row, Mr. Kunnummal drew flak from the Left Democratic Front (LDF) Ministers and the Opposition United Democratic Front (UDF) who accused him of overstepping his limit. Reacting to Mr. Kunnummal's decision here on Thursday, Higher Education Minister R. Bindu came out in strong support of Mr. Anil Kumar stating that Mr. Kunnummal had violated rules and misused his power. Ms. Bindu said the State government would seek legal advice on the matter. According to the Minister, Mr. Anil Kumar faces no problem in continuing with his official duties as Mr. Kunnummal has overstepped his mandate in suspending him. 'The university Syndicate is the appointing authority of the Registrar. That being so, the Syndicate has the authority to initiate disciplinary action against him. The Vice-Chancellor can bring the issue to the notice of the Syndicate,' she said, adding that Mr. Kunnummal has acted as a tool of the saffronisation agenda to remove the Registrar. Event at Senate Hall Ms. Bindu also said that Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar could have stayed away from the June 25 event at the Senate Hall of the university, given the tense situation there. She said the entire incident was part of the RSS attempts to 'infiltrate' the Bharat Mata motif, a religious symbol, into the secular mindset of the people. Leader of the Opposition V.D. Satheesan said the Vice-Chancellor does not have the power to suspend the Registrar. Mr. Kunnummal's decision is legally unsustainable, Mr. Satheesan said. The Governor, who is Chancellor of the university, should behave in a manner befitting his position, he said. Mr. Satheesan also pointed out that the Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan is yet to comment on the issue. General Education Minister V. Sivankutty also slammed Mr. Kunnummal's decision to place Mr. Anil Kumar under suspension. While Mr. Kunnummal's action was based on Rule 10 (13) of the Kerala University Act, Rule 10 (14) clearly points out that the Vice-Chancellor is empowered to initiate disciplinary action only against officials below the rank of deputy registrar, Mr. Sivankutty said. Raj Bhavan's demand Raj Bhavan is understood to have expressed its displeasure to the State Police over what it has described as a serious 'security lapse' during the SFI-DYFI marches taken out to Raj Bhavan on Wednesday night. Raj Bhavan has also sought stern action against police officers responsible for the alleged lapse, sources said. Meanwhile, Ciza Thomas, Vice Chancellor in-charge of the Kerala Technical University, assumed charge on Thursday as the V-C in-charge of the Kerala University as Mr. Kunnummal is on leave. She took charge under tight police presence and amid demonstrations carried out on the university campus. Left-aligned service organisations, including AKPCTA and the Kerala University Employees Union, also staged protests at the university headquarters against the suspension of the Registrar.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
HC denies bail to man for posts against PM, armed forces
The Allahabad high court on Wednesday rejected the bail application of a man accused of posting objectionable content on social media targeting the Prime Minister and the Indian Armed Forces. The Allahabad high court observed that the freedom of speech guaranteed under the Constitution does not extend to such acts which disrespect high dignitaries and incite disharmony among citizens. (File Photo) The high court observed that the freedom of speech guaranteed under the Constitution does not extend to such acts which disrespect high dignitaries and incite disharmony among citizens. Rejecting the bail application of Ashraf Khan alias Nisrat, justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal said it has become a 'fashion among certain groups of people' to misuse social media under the guise of freedom of expression by making unfounded allegations against national leaders and circulating content that spreads hatred and division. The accused was booked under sections 152 (acts that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India) and 197 (imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) at the Sasni police station of Hathras district. It was alleged that the accused uploaded edited videos to his Facebook account during the recent India-Pakistan military face-off. According to the prosecution, one video allegedly depicted Prime Minister Narendra Modi walking alongside a donkey pulling a cart fitted with an aircraft, and later portrayed him as apologising to Pakistan. Another portion of the post allegedly showed Wing Commander Vyomika Singh of the Indian Air Force seated beside the Pakistan Army chief, with captions suggesting that the PM was running to save himself from a Pakistani missile. Additional posts allegedly included slogans such as 'Pakistan Air Force Zindabad' and visuals of Indian aircraft being destroyed by Pakistani jets. Other objectionable content targeting defence minister Rajnath Singh and the PM was also found, according to the prosecution. During the hearing, the applicant's counsel argued that Khan was innocent and had not forwarded the objectionable posts himself, though they were found on his mobile phone. In contrast, the state counsel opposed the bail plea, arguing that the posts created social disharmony and insulted the Indian military establishment. In its order dated July 2 (Wednesday), the court concluded that the nature of the posts reflected disrespect not only towards the Prime Minister but also towards the Indian Armed Forces and its officers. 'Though our Constitution grants the right to freedom of speech and expression to every citizen, that freedom does not extend to posting videos and content that insult the Prime Minister, the Indian Military and its officers. Such actions not only cause social disharmony but also promote separatist sentiment and pose a threat to the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India,' the court observed. Accordingly, the bail application was rejected.
