'For better future of Bihar': Chirag Paswan announces candidacy for assembly elections; supports 'domicile policy'
Chirag, who is also a minister at the Centre, said, "People have been asking me whether Chirag Paswan will contest the assembly elections. I want to announce from Saran that yes, Chirag Paswan will contest the elections for the sake of a better future of Bihar."
"I will contest the election for the people of Bihar, for my brothers, mothers, for my sisters. We will build a system in Bihar that will truly take the state forward on the path of development.
I will realise the dreams of my father and work for 'Bihar first, Bihari first'. I will live and die for Bihar and its people," he added.
Unlike the rest of the parties in the NDA camp, Chirag also supported the domicile policy for government jobs in the state claiming " this has been a long-standing demand of job seekers."
"For the sake of the youth of Bihar, I am in support of the introduction of a domicile policy in government jobs.
This has been a long-standing demand of job seekers," Chirag said.
"I must inform you that the domicile policy was introduced in 2006, but it was withdrawn by the opposition parties when they came to power. The RJD and Congress never think about the betterment of the youth of the state. They always mislead people. If they come to power, they will snatch over half of your wealth via inheritance tax," he added.
Earlier, leader of opposition Tejashwi Yadav also promised per cent domicile" if the Mahagathbandhan came to power in the state after the elections.
However, Nitish Kumar government has ruled out the possibility of introduction of a domicile policy, claiming that any such move would be against the Constitution.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Karnataka must win over Tamil Nadu to unlock Mekedatu dam project, say experts
Bengaluru: Experts believe the impasse over the Mekedatu balancing reservoir project would not be permanent if Karnataka changes its approach from confrontation to collaboration. Planned at the confluence of Cauvery and Arkavathi rivers in Bengaluru South district, the Rs 9,000-crore project aims to store 48tmcft of water, supply 4.7tmcft for Bengaluru's drinking needs, and generate 400Mw of hydropower. Karnataka claims the project will help regulate water flow, prevent droughts and floods, and recharge groundwater. Despite political unity within Karnataka, the project has failed to move forward due to Tamil Nadu's opposition and pending approvals from central agencies. Tamil Nadu fears the dam will reduce its share of Cauvery water. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru A 2018 Supreme Court verdict on the Cauvery water-sharing issue did not prohibit Karnataka from building a dam at Mekedatu, but it said any such project must be cleared by Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA), which is bound to consider Tamil Nadu's objections. Although both states are now partners of the INDIA bloc, the dispute remains. For Karnataka, which is battling erratic rainfall and mounting demand in Bengaluru, shelving the project is not an option. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo The state assembly has repeatedly passed unanimous resolutions demanding early clearance, escalating tensions with Tamil Nadu. Deputy chief minister DK Shivakumar, who led a 168-km padyatra in 2023 ahead of the assembly polls in support of the project, has been less vocal in recent months. He continues to express commitment but blames the Centre for not facilitating inter-state talks or granting approvals. Experts say Karnataka must reposition the project as a cooperative effort. "This is a project that can move forward but only if Karnataka stops presenting it as a unilateral exercise," said Dr Roopesh Kumar, a retired professor and water policy expert. "It should bring Tamil Nadu into the process. There is room for negotiation under the Cauvery tribunal framework if Karnataka can prove that the project won't affect flows to Tamil Nadu. " Political analyst Vishwas Shetty believes Karnataka's unity on the project offers leverage. "This is a rare issue where all Karnataka parties agree. The state can use that consensus to build pressure on the Centre," he said. "But Karnataka must first assure Tamil Nadu through diplomatic and technical channels that its water share won't be compromised." JD(S) state chief and Union minister HD Kumaraswamy also urged a direct dialogue between states. "The Congress govt in Karnataka should convince the DMK govt in Tamil Nadu to clear the project. I will then get clearance from Prime Minister Narendra Modi in five minutes," he said. Tamil Nadu had passed resolutions opposing the project, citing the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, and moved the Supreme Court. "Any construction across the Cauvery by Karnataka will violate both tribunal and court orders," a senior Tamil Nadu official said. Karnataka maintains Mekedatu is a non-irrigation project and does not threaten Tamil Nadu's allocation of 404tmcft under the tribunal's final award and the apex court's revised 2018 order. Karnataka's allocation is 284tmcft. A Central Water Commission official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Karnataka must back its case with data. "Karnataka needs to submit a fresh, detailed project report with real-time data on flow, storage, and release mechanisms. If the DPR is watertight and shows that regulated releases will ensure Tamil Nadu's share, the Centre and CWMA may find it difficult to reject." A senior Jal Shakti ministry official said CWMA could mediate too. "CWMA's role isn't only to monitor releases; it can facilitate coordinated efforts to manage water resources. If both states are willing to discuss safeguards, a resolution is not impossible."
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
Prashant Kishor welcomes Bihar social media influencer Manish Kashyap into Jan Suraaj — ‘A union for change'
Bihar-based social media influencer Manish Kashyap officially joined Prashant Kishor's Jan Suraaj Monday – a development that comes a week after his resignation from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Kashyap was accompanied by a large group of his supporters for the event. This comes months ahead of the assembly election in Bihar. The 'union' between himself and Kashyap represented more than just a partnership between two young leaders, Kishor said at the event. 'This is not just a union of two youths. In Bihar, there are millions of young people who want change, who want to be free from the rule of Lalu, Nitish, and Modi. They want to be free from corruption, illiteracy, migration, and unemployment. This is a coming together of all those who have the passion and concern to see Bihar change, who want development here just like in other states,' Kishor said. He went on to say: 'We want migration to stop, and for our children to have education and employment. This is not just the union of two individuals or two names, but the union of the aspirations of those who have long wanted change in Bihar, but in the absence of options, have voted for Lalu out of fear of Modi and for Modi or Nitish out of fear of Lalu. Now, they see a path, an alternative, a right way forward to reform Bihar'. Kashyap joined the BJP ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha election. At that time, he had spent nine months in jail after he was arrested last year for 'circulating fake videos' on 'attacks on Bihari migrants in Tamil Nadu'. However, despite his significant social media following and public profile, he was not given a party ticket to contest the election. He officially announced his resignation from the BJP on June 8. In a video message he posted making the announcement, Kashyap accused the party of having 'used' him until the Delhi assembly election. This came after Kashyap was accused of assaulting and 'illegally' confining junior doctors in Patna Medical College and Hospital (PMCH) when he allegedly visited the hospital to advocate for a patient. He allegedly began recording a video inside the hospital, which escalated into the altercation, subsequently leading to him being assaulted and mistreated. He cited the incident for leaving the BJP, saying he felt abandoned by the incident after the incident.
India Today
3 hours ago
- India Today
Ex-chief justices back simultaneous polls, flag poll body's broad powers in bill
Former Chief Justices of India have supported the constitutionality of the 'one nation, one election' concept but raised concerns about the provisions of the proposed bill, particularly the wide powers granted to the Election Commission of India (ECI). Their views were conveyed to a parliamentary committee examining the bill on simultaneous a written opinion submitted to the Joint Committee of Parliament, former Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud dismissed the opposition's contention that synchronising Lok Sabha and state assembly elections violates the Constitution's basic argument that staggered elections are a part of the Constitution's basic structure (or form part of the principles of federalism or democracy) does not hold. Staggered timing of elections cannot be considered as a feature of the original Constitution, let alone an immutable feature,' he said. Chandrachud, however, expressed reservations over the 'sweeping powers' the bill seeks to grant the Election Commission. He warned that such 'unbounded authority' could allow the poll body to extend or curtail the tenure of a state assembly beyond the constitutionally mandated five years under the pretext of aligning elections with the Lok Sabha. 'The Constitution must define, delineate and structure the circumstances under which the ECI may invoke this power,' he Chief Justices Ranjan Gogoi and J S Kehar are scheduled to appear before the committee on July 11 for discussions with members over the bill's provisions. Gogoi had earlier appeared before the committee in March and shared concerns about excessive powers being given to the Chief Justice U U Lalit had appeared in February and advised that simultaneous polls be introduced in a phased manner. He warned that cutting short the terms of state assemblies with significant tenure left for synchronisation could invite legal their concerns, all three former Chief Justices agreed that the idea of simultaneous elections does not breach the Constitution. Chandrachud said, 'Simultaneous elections will not infringe upon the voters' right to elect their representatives and that the bill ensures that electors remain continuously represented by their duly elected MPs or MLAs.' He further criticised arguments against the bill as being based on the belief that 'the Indian electorate is naive and can be easily manipulated.'Chandrachud also cautioned that simultaneous elections could marginalise regional and smaller parties due to the influence of better-funded national parties. 'To ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened,' he pointed out that while individual candidates face spending limits under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, there are no caps on party the bill's proposal that houses elected through midterm polls will only serve the remainder of the original five-year term, Chandrachud flagged concerns about the effectiveness of such short-term governments. He said their ability to implement meaningful projects would be constrained, as the Model Code of Conduct would apply six months before the next members of the parliamentary panel have echoed this concern, questioning the capacity of short-tenure governments to deliver on policy and governance.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#One Nation One Election
