Opposition on board for Judge Varma's ouster: Kiren Rijiju
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Days ahead of Parliament's monsoon session, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju said prominent opposition parties have given their in-principle approval to support the motion to remove Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma and the process of collecting signatures could begin soon.Rijiju, who holds the charge of Parliamentary Affairs Ministry, said an inquiry committee will be set up by the presiding officer of the House concerned to probe charges against Justice Varma.According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought.The committee consists of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a "distinguished jurist."For Lok Sabha, signatures of a minimum 100 MPs is required. For the Rajya Sabha, the requirement is the support of at least 50 MPs.However, he added that the government is yet to decide whether the motion would be brought in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha."I have spoken to prominent opposition parties who have in principle agreed for his removal. We will follow the laid down procedure (for the process). The government wants matters related to judiciary to be beyond political lines and there should be consensus and unified stand," Rijiju said.He further said the government will start collecting the signatures of MPs - after deciding which House should initiate the process - next week.The Monsoon session will commence from July 21 and end on August 21.Rijiju said since the matter involves corruption in the judiciary, the government wants all political parties to be on board.On being asked about the report of the in-committee which proved the cash discovery incident at Justice Varma's official residence here, he said the report of the three-judge panel had not indicted Justice Varma and was meant to recommend future course of action as Parliament can only remove a judge.A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court, had led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of banknotes in the outhouse.Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement.Then-CJI Sanjiv Khanna is believed to have prodded him to resign but Justice Varma dug in his heels.The apex court has since repatriated him to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work.Justice Khanna had written to the president and the PM, recommending the removal, which is the procedure for axing members of the higher judiciary from service.
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
26 minutes ago
- Business Standard
HC reserves verdict on pleas against UP govt's move to pair schools
The Allahabad High Court on Friday concluded hearing on pleas challenging the Uttar Pradesh government's decision to pair primary and upper primary schools with fewer than 50 students with nearby institutions, but reserved its verdict. A bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia reserved the order on two separate petitions filed by Krishna Kumari and others, who are seeking the cancellation of the state government's June 16 order. The petitioners' counsel, LP Mishra and Gaurav Mehrotra, argued that the state government's action violates Article 21A of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to education for children aged between six and 14 years. They contended that the implementation of the decision would deprive children of their right to education in their neighbourhood. The government should instead focus on improving the standard of schools to attract more students, the petitioners said. It was argued by the petitioners that the government has chosen the "easier way" of closing these schools, rather than working towards public welfare, overriding economic gains or losses. However, Additional Advocate General Anuj Kudesia, Chief Standing Counsel Shailendra Singh, and Senior Advocate Sandeep Dixit, representing the director of basic education, argued the government's decision was made according to rules and is free from flaws or illegalities. They stated that many schools have very few, or even no students and clarified that the government has not "merged" the schools but "paired" them, assuring that no primary schools are closed. During the hearing, Kudesia requested the court to ban reporting on the case, claiming that the ongoing coverage was "tarnishing the image of government lawyers." However, Justice Bhatia rejected this demand, stating that while the government could frame a law to that effect if it wished, the court would not issue such an order. (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.)
Hindustan Times
29 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Govt notifies rules to implement Waqf Act
The Union government on Friday notified the rules that will operationalise the contentious Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025, focussing largely on the functioning of the central portal where Islamic charitable endowments will be registered and leaving some finer details to the states. Muslims attend the 'Waqf Bachao - Dastur Bachao' conference at Gandhi Maidan in Patna, Bihar. (Santosh Kumar/HT photo) The 32-page document issued by the Union ministry of minority affairs is now set to be laid before Parliament during the upcoming monsoon session commencing July 21. HT first reported on June 20 that the rules would be published within 15 days. If Parliament makes any changes, the rules will be published in the gazette again, said a senior ministry official. 'The act in itself was quite elaborate so the rules have been kept short and to the point, mostly centering around the portal itself. Now the ministry's work is done and the rules will be laid in the upcoming Parliament session. The states have the biggest task now which is to make their own rules under the act,' said a senior ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity. The rules were framed under Section 108B, which was inserted into the 1995 Waqf Act by the amendments passed earlier this year and which allowed the Centre to make rules for waqf asset management system, registration, accounts, audit and other details of waqf, and the manner of payments for maintenance of widow, divorced woman and orphans. The Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development (UMEED) Rules, 2025 primarily operationalised the national UMEED portal launched last month, establishing a centralised digital database for Waqf properties supervised by the joint secretary of the ministry's waqf division. Key portal functions included filing detailed Waqf records, registering new Waqfs, maintaining electronic registers, submitting annual accounts, and auto-generating unique IDs for each Waqf and property. The rules establish a six-month deadline for uploading all existing Waqf properties onto the portal. State governments must publish surveyed lists of auqaf (plural of waqf) and upload them within 90 days of the rules' gazette publication, with possible 90-day extensions requiring stated reasons. 'Every mutawalli [custodian] shall enrol on the portal and database by using his mobile number and e-mail address through authentication by one time password received from the portal and database on the mobile and e-mail and thereafter be able to access the portal and database and file details of his waqf and property dedicated to the waqf,' the rules said. One of the most important provisions detailed in the new rules is about the registration of a new waqf. 'A waqf created after the commencement of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 shall make an application to the board for its registration under section 36 of the act within three months of its creation,' the rules said. The board, in this case, is the Central Waqf Board. The application for registration will have to be made on the portal and needs a description of the property, a copy of waqf deed, gross annual income, amount of land revenue, cesses, rates and taxes annually payable, estimate of the expenses, amount set aside for mutawalli, maintenance for widows, divorced women and orphans,and whether the property stood on protected or government land, among others. 'The collector shall inquire the genuineness and validity of the application and the particulars mentioned therein in accordance with the revenue laws…the collector shall submit the report to the board within a period of sixty days,' the rules said. This practically invalidates verbal waqf declarations, an age-old and controversial practice. It also effectively scraps the waqf-by-user provision – where a property is acknowledged as waqf because it has been used for religious activities for some time, despite there being no official declaration or registration as waqf – with prospective effect. The rules permit widows, divorced women, and orphans to apply for maintenance from dormant family waqfs (waqf-alal-aulad), requiring identity and residence proofs with payments made electronically. Waqf Boards must maintain electronic registers, publish audit reports online, and disclose board orders within 10 working days. Mutawallis must submit annual accounts electronically by October 1 each year, with the annual contribution to waqf boards capped at one crore rupees. An independent central agency will review the portal annually, and state governments must appoint nodal officers at the joint secretary level. 'On filing of the details of waqf and properties thereof by the mutawalli on the portal and database, the chief executive officer or any other officer duly authorised in writing by the board shall…certify the correctness of the information and particulars…within ten days,' the rules said. A waqf is a Muslim religious endowment, usually in the form of landed property, made for purposes of charity and community welfare. The contentious amendments to the central waqf law, which aims to make sweeping changes in the regulation and management of Islamic charitable endowments, was cleared by Parliament in April. The Supreme Court has reserved its judgment on a raft of petitions asking for a stay on some of the law's controversial provisions. Activists, opposition parties and bodies such as the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) challenged key provisions of the new law. The law accords more power to the government and allows for the appointment of non-Muslims and women to waqf boards, but the Opposition alleged it is unconstitutional. The rules mark a major landmark in operationalising the controversial law. But some experts raised concerns that the rules were silent on some of the more controversial provisions of the law – such as permitting women, Shia sects and government officials to be members of waqf bodies or allowing only a person 'showing or demonstrating that he is practising Islam for at least five years' to donate properties to waqf. They also said the conduct of the officials regulating or overseeing the registration process was undefined. Senior Advocate Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, who appeared before the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Waqf, pointed out gaps. Ayyubi expressed disappointment that the rules failed to define the qualifications, jurisdiction, or operational procedures for the 'designated officer' envisaged under the rules: 'I was expecting that they would indicate the qualifications or jurisdiction or area of the designated officers... how he will operate or something on that aspect. So that's something which is not there.' He also underlined that the rules were silent on how someone can fulfil the 'practising Muslim' clause. 'If there is any problem, then they can approach the court, but then everyone will start approaching the court because nothing is clear.'
Hindustan Times
30 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Won't rush on trade deal to meet deadline'
India will not hurry into signing a free trade agreement under pressure from any deadline, commerce minister Piyush Goyal said on Friday, when asked whether a deal could be reached with the US in time for a July 9 deadline set by Washington. Union minister of Commerce and Industry Piyush Goyal. (Jitender Gupta) Speaking on the sidelines of the 16th Toy Biz International B2B Expo in New Delhi, Goyal emphasised that India is ready to make trade deals in the national interest but it 'never negotiates trade deals with a deadline'. When asked specifically about prospects of an interim US deal by July 9, he said any agreement would be announced only when 'fully finalised, properly concluded and in the national interest.' The minister's comments came as India's negotiating team, led by chief negotiator Rajesh Agrawal, returned to Delhi Thursday after week-long talks in Washington. Despite having a draft interim agreement in hand, people familiar with the discussions said, key issues around automobiles and agriculture remain unresolved. The government has refused to fully open its agriculture sector, particularly around genetically modified crops and dairy products. The country remains unwilling to allow items like soybean and corn unless certified as non-GM, since GM crops are banned domestically. 'India was, however, willing to give some product-specific concessions where its farmers were completely protected,' said one of these people, asking not to be named. On dairy, India cited two main concerns: the subsistence-level nature of its farming, where millions depend on just one or two cows or buffaloes, and religious sensitivities around US cattle feed that includes non-vegetarian products. 'The livelihoods of millions of farmers are at stake as they could not compete with America's commercial-scale dairy farms,' said a second person, speaking on condition of anonymity. To protect its farmers, India has softened its initial demand for the US to completely revoke the 26% 'Liberation Day' reciprocal tariff that President Trump announced April 2, the second official stated. The tariff comprises a 10% baseline levy already in effect and an additional 16% country-specific tariff set to trigger July 9. India had originally sought withdrawal of all retaliatory tariffs but appears willing to accept partial relief in exchange for limited agricultural concessions. Outside of these negotiations, India on Friday told the World Trade Organization that it plans to go ahead with levies on some US goods in retaliation to Washington's higher tariffs on automobiles and their components. US' safeguard measures would hit $2.9 billion imports annually from India with $723.75 million in duties. 'Accordingly, India's proposed suspension of concessions would result in an equivalent amount of duty collected from products originating in the US,' according to a notification sent to the WTO. The current negotiations focus on an 'early harvest' deal covering goods alone, which would serve as a precursor to the first tranche of a comprehensive Bilateral Trade Agreement expected by October 2025. That broader deal would include services and investment provisions. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Trump agreed in February to more than double bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030 through a full-scale agreement. Goyal noted India is simultaneously negotiating trade deals with multiple partners, having recently concluded agreements with the UAE, Australia and UK, while talks continue with the EU, New Zealand, Oman, Chile and Peru. 'FTAs are possible when both sides benefit,' Goyal said in Hindi. 'National interest should always be supreme.' The two sides will continue engaging virtually as the July 9 deadline approaches, the people cited above added.
