Maharashtra CM hails Ujjwal Nikam's nomination to Rajya Sabha
Congratulating the SPP for his journey 'from the courts to the Parliament,' CM Fadnavis thanked President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi for 'nominating a personality like Ujjwal Nikam to the Rajya Sabha.'
'We all know that he has extensively worked as a public prosecutor against terrorism and in national security cases,' CM Fadnavis said.
SPP Ujjwal Nikam is best known for handling high-profile criminal cases, including the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks trial of Ajmal Kasab and the 1993 Bombay blasts case.
'PM Narendra Modi always stands behind nationalists. I congratulate Ujjwal Nikam for his journey from the courts to the Parliament,' the Chief Minister added.
Earlier today, Nikam expressed gratitude to President Droupadi Murmu after being nominated to the Rajya Sabha. He said that PM Modi personally informed him about the nomination via a phone call.
'I thank President Droupadi Murmu for nominating me. When I met PM Narendra Modi during the Lok Sabha election campaign, he expressed his faith in me. Yesterday, PM Modi called to inform me about the nomination. He asked whether he should speak in Hindi or Marathi--both of us laughed. Then he spoke to me in Marathi and told me that the President wanted to assign me a responsibility, and he informed me of her decision,' Nikam told ANI.
Nikam, along with former Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla; C Sadanandan Master, a veteran social worker and educationist from Kerala; and Meenakshi Jain, a noted historian, was nominated to the Rajya Sabha by the President of India--recognising their excellence in public service and scholarship.
Shringla, known for his distinguished diplomatic career, served as India's Ambassador to the United States and Bangladesh, and was Foreign Secretary from January 2020 to April 2022. Sadanandan Master has decades of grassroots service in Kerala, while Meenakshi Jain is widely recognised for her contributions to the study of Indian history and civilisation.
These individuals were nominated under the powers conferred by Article 80(1)(a) of the Constitution, read with clause (3) of the same article. The nominations fill vacancies created by the retirement of previously nominated members.
The Ministry of Home Affairs announced the nominations through an official notification. These appointments are seen as a recognition of significant national contributions in the fields of law, diplomacy, social service, and historical scholarship. (ANI)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs from the Education Department under Trump's federal downsizing push
US Supreme Court approves nearly 1,400 layoffs in the Education Department. In a ruling that could permanently alter the landscape of American public education, the US Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education, a key step in President Trump's broader plan to decentralise federal control and shift responsibility for education back to the states. The court's unsigned emergency order effectively lifts a lower court's block on the administration's move to terminate more than 1,300 federal employees. Critics say this will gut the department's core functions, including oversight of civil rights protections in schools, financial aid distribution, and special education services. The Education Department began 2025 with over 4,000 employees. Post-layoffs, the workforce is expected to shrink by nearly half, after including probationary dismissals and voluntary resignations. Particularly affected is the Office for Civil Rights, where seven out of twelve regional offices have already been shut down. Judiciary expands presidential power The Supreme Court's decision marks another major expansion of executive power, signalling judicial backing for Trump's efforts to reconfigure, or even dismantle, a department created by Congress nearly 50 years ago. The ruling did not include a vote breakdown, but liberal justices dissented strongly. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing on behalf of Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, warned that the court was enabling an unconstitutional overreach. She argued that only Congress has the power to eliminate a cabinet-level department, and that the administration's unilateral action would inflict "untold harm" on students, particularly those affected by discrimination, disability, or lack of educational access. From the executive order to legal showdown President Trump had signed an executive order in March directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of shutting down the department. He cited low student test scores and bureaucratic inefficiency as justification for transferring federal education functions back to the states. Almost immediately, legal challenges erupted. School districts, education unions, and 21 Democratic-led states filed lawsuits in federal court, arguing that dismantling the department without congressional approval violated the Constitution and federal statutes. Judge Myong Joun of the US District Court in Massachusetts had sided with the plaintiffs in May, ordering the administration to halt layoffs and reinstate fired workers. His ruling was later upheld by the First Circuit Court of Appeals. But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now reversed course, allowing the layoffs to resume while the underlying legal battle continues. Reactions split along political lines Trump and his allies celebrated the ruling as a victory for local control and executive leadership. The White House reiterated that the president has full constitutional authority to reorganise federal agencies, and said the cuts were necessary to streamline operations and reduce federal overreach. Education Secretary McMahon stated that the department will proceed with a reduction in force to promote efficiency and accountability, while continuing to carry out statutory duties with a scaled-back staff. Democratic lawmakers and education advocates condemned the decision. Senator Chuck Schumer said the move amounts to sabotage of public education, adding that it's American kids paying the price. Sheria Smith, president of the union representing Education Department workers, warned that the firings would disrupt critical programs and services that millions of families rely on. What comes next While the court's decision allows the layoffs to proceed immediately, the underlying lawsuits are far from over. Courts are still examining whether the Trump administration's move to essentially dismantle the department violates congressional authority and statutory mandates. Meanwhile, the impact is already rippling through the education system. Several states have reported delays in federal funding for after-school programs, summer learning, and civil rights compliance. With fewer federal employees in place to monitor and enforce these mandates, education equity advocates fear that marginalised students will suffer the most. The future of the Education Department, and the federal role in American schooling, now hangs in a precarious legal and political balance. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
14 minutes ago
- Business Standard
BJP welcomes CAT stay on Urdu mandate for Naib Tehsildar posts in J&K
The BJP on Monday welcomed the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) for staying the government order making Urdu mandatory for applying to the post of Naib Tehsildar in Jammu and Kashmir. The CAT directed the Jammu and Kashmir Services Selection Recruitment Board (SSRB) to accept applications from candidates who possess a graduation with knowledge of any of the five official languages Hindi, Kashmiri, English, Dogri, and Urdu. The Bharatiya Janata Party legislative party on Monday held a dharna in front of the Civil Secretariat and Assembly to lodge their protest and press for the revocation of the government order making Urdu mandatory for Naib Tehsildar examinations in Jammu and Kashmir. "We welcome the decision of the CAT to stay this illegal and discriminatory order of the National Conference government. It is our victory", Senior High Court lawyer and MLA R S Pathania told reporters here. The bench comprising Member (A) Ram Mohan Johri and Member (J) Rajinder Singh Dogra had given the verdict on the matter. The applicants, represented by Senior Advocate Abhinav Sharma and Advocate Abhirash Sharma, challenged the Urdu language condition as being "ultra vires the Constitution of India," citing violations of the principles of equality and non-discrimination. CAT issued notices to the respondents, directing them to file their reply within four weeks from the date of this order. The next date of hearing is fixed for August 13. BJP MLA said that it is good news that CAT has stayed the government order on Urdu. "All candidates can now file their applications for the post of Naib Tehsildars. There is no discrimination on the basis of language ", he said. (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.)
Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- Indian Express
2-language policy or 3?: After Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra, Karnataka wades into debate
Taking a leaf out of Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu's book, the Congress government in Karnataka has thrown its hat into the ring by resisting the three-language policy proposed in the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020. While the government is viewing the three-language policy as a way to 'impose Hindi' on the state, its move towards a two-language curriculum has also stirred unease. Currently, Karnataka follows a three-language policy in state board-affiliated schools, allowing students to choose either Hindi, Sanskrit or any other Indian language as the third language from Class 6. Meanwhile, the first and second languages remain Kannada and English, respectively. However, in Urdu-, Marathi-, Telugu- and Tamil-medium schools, the first language would be the respective language of the medium of instruction. While the second language choice is mostly English, the third language is either Hindi or Kannada. In a post on X on June 29, the Karnataka Congress had stated that mandating Hindi as a third language in schools would create discord and pose learning difficulties for Kannada, Tulu and Kodava speakers. 'South India's linguistic diversity is a vibrant tapestry, weaving together languages like Kannada, Kodava, Tulu, Konkani, Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, and many others. However, mandating Hindi as a third language in schools, especially in non-Hindi-speaking states like Karnataka, creates discord. For speakers of Kannada, Tulu, or Kodava who are fluent in Kannada and English, struggling with written Hindi is a significant challenge—a sentiment shared by many students in linguistically rich regions,' the post read. It also further stated that forcing Hindi can hinder students who excel in other areas. Speaking to reporters in Mysuru earlier this month, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah backed a two-language policy and emphasised that his government was committed to it. The push for a two-language policy has been backed by education expert Niranjanaradhya VP, who is also a key member of the government's State Education Policy (SEP) commission, headed by former UGC chairman Sukhadeo Thorat. 'Introducing a third language causes an additional burden on the child, which will hamper their cognitive skills. Like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka should also stick to two languages in state board schools, with one regional language, Kannada, and the other one being English. Studies have proved that language proficiency is higher among adults than children. Hence, introducing additional languages early on will hinder their cognitive skills,' he noted. Sources in the government said that the school education department has yet to consider a policy shift in language. Moreover, the SEP commission has yet to submit a report on the two-language policy. However, this idea has not been well received among private school management associations, education experts, pro-Kannada groups, and other stakeholders. On July 13, Basavaraj Horatti, Chairman of the Karnataka Legislative Council, wrote to Siddaramaiah, urging him to continue with the three-language formula to foster multilingualism and national integration as envisaged in the Kothari Education Commission (1964-1966). 'The three-language formula equips students with the ability to communicate effectively in different languages, allowing them to pursue higher education and careers across various states. Psychological studies suggest that learning multiple languages enhances cognitive development,' he said. He added, 'It is noteworthy that over 17,909 students in the state scored a perfect 100 in Hindi in the SSLC examinations—more than in any other subject. While some argue that students fail more frequently in Hindi, statistics show that more students pass in Hindi than in many other subjects. In fact, strong performance in Hindi often contributes to improving the overall academic results.' Horatti also raised concerns over the livelihood of 15,000 Hindi teachers and their families in the state if the government decided to drop the three-language formula. On July 12, D Shashikumar, General Secretary, Associated Managements of Primary and Secondary Schools in Karnataka (KAMS), warned of legal action if the state government decides to drop the existing three-language policy in state board-affiliated schools. In a representation to Siddaramaiah, the association appealed not to disturb the existing three-language policy, and instead implement key reforms to the language assessment system in the interest of the students. 'The Karnataka government is indulging in knee-jerk reactions following the developments in Maharashtra. We are, of course, against the imposition of Hindi. However, we believe a third language with the option of learning Hindi or Sanskrit or any other Indian language will enhance the cognitive skills of the students,' Shashikumar said. He added that limiting language choice violates parents' and students' fundamental rights as per various landmark Supreme Court judgments. 'Switching to a two-language policy will hamper the livelihood of 4,000 Urdu-medium schools and their teachers. What will happen to them? What will be the plight of linguistic minorities in the state who speak Tamil, Tulu, Telugu, and Marathi? They will be devoid of linguistic choices,' said Shashikumar. He also appealed to the state government to bring the first language marks in SSLC down to 100 from 125, to ensure parity with other boards. Sanath Prasad is a senior sub-editor and reporter with the Bengaluru bureau of Indian Express. He covers education, transport, infrastructure and trends and issues integral to Bengaluru. He holds more than two years of reporting experience in Karnataka. His major works include the impact of Hijab ban on Muslim girls in Karnataka, tracing the lives of the victims of Kerala cannibalism, exploring the trends in dairy market of Karnataka in the aftermath of Amul-Nandini controversy, and Karnataka State Elections among others. If he is not writing, he keeps himself engaged with badminton, swimming, and loves exploring. ... Read More
