State govt to hold meeting on Devnarayan scheme pending issues
Gurjar Aarakshan Sangharsh Samiti, led by Vijay Bainsla, had previously demanded that State govt to soon convene a meeting to review backlogs under Devnarayan scheme.
He had raised concerns on 'X' about critical situation at Devnarayan Govt Girls Residential School in Maksudanpura, Sawai Madhopur, where 280 students are affected by a complete staff vacancy. He wrote, "At Devnarayan Government Girls' Residential School, Maksudanpura, the future of 280 girls is in jeopardy. What could be more appalling for any school than having vacancies from principal to fourth-grade positions? Was this the purpose of establishing Devnarayan Scheme?" He added, "This situation is prevalent in most schools, which is why we have to organise a grand council!" he wrote.
Bainsla also said, "Before end of this month, we will be holding another meeting with the community in Western Rajasthan. We need to give a status update about the agreement reached between Gurjar Aarakshan Sangharsh Samiti and the Rajasthan govt at the Peelupara Mahapanchayat on June 8."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Centre opposes Kerala's stand in SC to withdraw case against Governor
Senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala govt, sought to withdraw the plea saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the TN Governor case Press Trust of India New Delhi The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned to July 25 the pleas of the Kerala government against Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar deferred the matter after attorney general R Venkataramani sought time. Senior advocate K K Venugopal, appearing for the Kerala government, sought to withdraw the plea saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor case. Venkataramani and solicitor general Tushar Mehta opposed the submission and urged the court to await the top court's decision on the reference of President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills. Mehta said the Kerala government's petition could also be referred to be tagged along with the presidential reference. Calling it strange , Venugopal asked how could his plea be opposed. "Why my lords are hesitant for the state to withdraw the petition? There has to be some only means both parties will charge money," he said. The bench then remarked, "We will make it very clear, tentatively there can't be an objection to withdraw." The matter was then posted on July 25. On April 22, the top court said it would examine whether the recent judgement on a plea of Tamil Nadu, fixing timelines for the grant of assent to bills, covered the issues raised by the Kerala government in its pleas. Acting on a plea of Tamil Nadu government, an apex court bench on April 8 set aside the reservation of the 10 bills for President's consideration in the second round holding it as illegal, erroneous in law. The bench, for the first time, also prescribed a time limit for President to decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by Governor. It set a three-month timeframe from the date on which such reference was received. Kerala sought similar directions in its petition. In 2023, the top court expressed displeasure over then Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan "sitting" for two years on bills passed by the state legislature. Khan is currently Governor of Bihar. The top court, on July 26, last year, agreed to consider the plea of opposition-ruled Kerala alleging the denial of assent to bills passed by the legislative assembly. The Kerala government alleged that Khan referred certain bills to President Droupadi Murmu and those were yet to be cleared. Taking note of the pleas, the top court issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries of Kerala Governor. The state said its plea related to the acts of Governor in reserving seven bills, which he was required to deal with himself, to the President. Not one of the seven bills had anything to do with Centre-state relations, it argued. The bills were pending with the Governor for as long as two years and his action "subverted" the functioning of the state legislature, rendering its very existence "ineffective and otiose", the state added. "The bills include public interest bills that are for the public good, and even these have been rendered ineffective by the Governor not dealing with each one of them 'as soon as possible', as required by the proviso to Article 200," the plea said. The state government had said the home ministry informed it that President had withheld assent to four of the seven bills -- University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021; Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2022; University Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2022; and University Laws (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, 2022. The Constitution is silent on how much time the President can take in granting assent to a bill passed by a state legislature and referred to the Rashtrapati Bhavan for presidential consideration or for denying consent. Article 361 of the Constitution says the President, or Governor of a state, shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Protocol Ignored, Says Siddaramaiah On Bridge Inauguration 'Snub', BJP Shares 'Proof'
The chief minister also revealed that he had asked Gadkari to push the programme to a later date, as he was not 'intimated' in advance The Congress and BJP are at loggerheads once again, this time over the inauguration of a bridge in Karnataka, after chief minister Siddaramaiah called out the Union government for keeping state representatives away from the ceremony. Union minister for road transport and highways Nitin Gadkari inaugurated the Kalasavalli-Ambargondlu or the Sigandur bridge in Karnataka's Shivamogga on Monday even as the chief minister and other Congress leaders skipped the ceremony. The bridge, built at a cost of Rs 473 crore, is India's second-longest cable-stayed bridge. An irate Siddaramaiah, while speaking to reporters, said: 'They should invite us right? Who created this Centre-state tussle? They created it … they should follow protocols. It's happening in our state." He also revealed that he had asked Gadkari to push the programme to a later date as he was not 'intimated" in advance. In a letter to the Union minister, Siddaramaiah cited his scheduled visit to Indi taluk in Vijayapura district to say MoRTH should have consulted with the state government before scheduling the programme. 'It has come to my notice that the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways along with National Highway Authority of India is organising 'Dedication to Nation and Foundation Stone Laying Ceremony" Programme on 14th of July, 2025 in Nehru Field, Sagara Taluk, Shivamogga District, and my name has also been printed in the draft invitation card. However, I have not been intimated about this programme in advance," Siddaramaiah wrote. The letter, however, seemed to have no impact as the bridge was inaugurated on Monday in the absence of the chief minister and other leaders. 'I had called Nitin Gadkari and asked him to postpone the programme. He said he would postpone it. But now, bowing to pressure from local BJP leaders, they are going ahead with the event. I have not received any invitation. We always extend cooperation to railway projects — they invite us for those. But here, protocol has been violated. As a mark of protest, none of us is participating in the programme. Congress MLAs from the region, the district minister, and the minister for public works are all staying away. They are deliberately creating a rift between the central and state governments," Siddaramaiah said. The BJP, meanwhile, sought to clear the air on the controversy and released a copy of a letter signed by Gadkari that invited the chief minister to the inauguration ceremony. Dated July 12—just two days before the inauguration—the letter said Siddaramaiah was free to join via a video link if he could not make it to the ceremony. view comments First Published: July 14, 2025, 13:51 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Delay in assent to bills: Centre opposes Kerala's stand to withdraw plea against Guv in SC
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned to July 25 the pleas of the Kerala government against Governor over the delay in approving bills passed by the state assembly.A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar deferred the matter after attorney general R Venkataramani sought advocate K K Venugopal , appearing for the Kerala government, sought to withdraw the plea saying that the issue had become infructuous in view of the recent judgment passed in the Tamil Nadu Governor and solicitor general Tushar Mehta opposed the submission and urged the court to await the top court's decision on the reference of President under Article 143 of the Constitution over the grant of assent to bills Mehta said the Kerala government's petition could also be referred to be tagged along with the presidential it strange , Venugopal asked how could his plea be opposed."Why my lords are hesitant for the state to withdraw the petition? There has to be some only means both parties will charge money," he bench then remarked, "We will make it very clear, tentatively there can't be an objection to withdraw."The matter was then posted on July April 22, the top court said it would examine whether the recent judgement on a plea of Tamil Nadu, fixing timelines for the grant of assent to bills, covered the issues raised by the Kerala government in its on a plea of Tamil Nadu government, an apex court bench on April 8 set aside the reservation of the 10 bills for President's consideration in the second round holding it as illegal, erroneous in bench, for the first time, also prescribed a time limit for President to decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by Governor. It set a three-month timeframe from the date on which such reference was sought similar directions in its 2023, the top court expressed displeasure over then Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan "sitting" for two years on bills passed by the state is currently Governor of top court, on July 26, last year, agreed to consider the plea of opposition-ruled Kerala alleging the denial of assent to bills passed by the legislative assembly The Kerala government alleged that Khan referred certain bills to President Droupadi Murmu and those were yet to be note of the pleas, the top court issued notices to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the secretaries of Kerala state said its plea related to the acts of Governor in reserving seven bills, which he was required to deal with himself, to the one of the seven bills had anything to do with Centre-state relations, it bills were pending with the Governor for as long as two years and his action "subverted" the functioning of the state legislature, rendering its very existence "ineffective and otiose", the state added."The bills include public interest bills that are for the public good, and even these have been rendered ineffective by the Governor not dealing with each one of them 'as soon as possible', as required by the proviso to Article 200," the plea state government had said the home ministry informed it that President had withheld assent to four of the seven bills -- University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021; Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2022; University Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2022; and University Laws (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, Constitution is silent on how much time the President can take in granting assent to a bill passed by a state legislature and referred to the Rashtrapati Bhavan for presidential consideration or for denying 361 of the Constitution says the President, or Governor of a state, shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.
