KTR dares Revanth for public debate on Medigadda Barrage
Speaking at a meeting with the Dalit Bandhu Sadhana Samithi at Telangana Bhavan on Wednesday, Rama Rao launched a scathing attack on Revanth Reddy's credibility and knowledge. 'If he really believes the Medigadda barrage has collapsed, let him come there and debate in front of the people' said KTR. He reminded people that BRS had earlier invited the Chief Minister for a public debate, offering him three full days of preparation. 'We went to the Press Club, ready to debate. But Revanth ran away. He is a coward who talks big and disappears when confronted,' he said. 'Now again, I'm challenging him... let's have the debate, not at Nagarjunasagar as he challenged, but at Medigadda barrage itself,' KTR said.
The BRS leader mentioned that senior party leader and former Minister Jagadish Reddy had already visited the Medigadda site and renewed the challenge. 'If he has the courage, the Chief Minister must come and face us,' KTR demanded. He also stated that despite Revanth Reddy knowing well that it was former CM K Chandrashekar Rao who ensured water supply to tail-end farmers in regions like Tungaturthi and Suryapet, Revanth continues to spread blatant lies for political mileage, he alleged.
Continuing his criticism, the BRS working president condemned the repeated use of vulgar and undignified language by the CM. 'Revanth Reddy keeps calling me a thief. When asked to implement his poll promises, he shamelessly says things like 'Do what you want. Will you cut and bite me?' This is not the language of a responsible public representative. Let the people of Telangana respond to this in the upcoming local body elections,' he warned. Quoting the Constitution, KTR said, 'Dr BR Ambedkar would never have imagined that individuals like Revanth Reddy, frauds and conmen would come to power. That's why the Constitution gave a five-year term, otherwise there would've been a recall mechanism to throw such people out of office.' 'Personally, I don't believe in using abusive language in politics. But with Revanth, there is no choice. He only understands gutter language.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
34 minutes ago
- News18
Congress's OBC Panel Bets Big On Caste Census Narrative, Siddaramaiah At Bengaluru Meeting
Calling Rahul Gandhi a 'Nyaya Yoddha', the OBC Advisory Council passed a 3-point resolution that the Congress hopes will define its social justice pitch ahead of the Bihar polls The All India Congress Committee (AICC)'s OBC Advisory Council meeting in Bengaluru on Wednesday saw some major messaging—both ahead of the Bihar elections and as a strong show of support for Siddaramaiah as Karnataka's chief minister. By the end of the one-and-a-half-day meet, the message was loud and clear: the Congress wants to reclaim its Other Backward Classes (OBC) base, push the Centre for a caste census, and back Rahul Gandhi's 'jitni aabadi, utna haq" (rights proportionate to population) campaign. Calling Rahul Gandhi a 'Nyaya Yoddha" (Justice Warrior), the council passed what's now being referred to as the Bengaluru Declaration—a three-point resolution that the party hopes will define its social justice pitch in the run-up to the Bihar polls. The most significant demand in the Bengaluru Declaration was a national-level caste census, to be conducted officially by the Census Commission of India (ORGI). The council said the exercise must go beyond enumeration and include social, economic, educational, employment, and political details, using the Telangana Socio-Educational-Employment-Economic-Political-Caste (SEEEPC) survey model as a reference. Siddaramaiah reminded delegates that Karnataka had already carried out a similar survey under the Kantharaju Commission, initiated in 2015 during his first term and submitted only in 2024. It has since been pushed into cold storage, dismissed as 'dated". But the Congress government has now ordered a fresh survey, expected to be completed by October this year. 'There must be a fight for 75% reservation or proportional representation based on actual data," Siddaramaiah told the leaders. 'We must demand political representation and economic justice—including reservation in private sector jobs, promotions, contracts, schemes, and market access." The second resolution called for breaking the 50% cap on reservations, echoing Rahul Gandhi's statement last year that the ceiling is 'arbitrary" and an obstacle to justice. Gandhi has publicly committed to removing the ceiling through legislation, calling it 'necessary to protect the Constitution". The council also backed Gandhi's criticism that the history of Dalits and backward communities is being erased from school textbooks. Leaders agreed that states must support his push if the Congress wants to 'grow and survive". The third resolution called for enforcing reservation in private educational institutions as per Article 15(5) of the Constitution. Siddaramaiah also used the platform to hit out at the BJP and the Sangh Parivar. 'They polarise India through caste. We will unite India through the Constitution. They treat OBCs as mere symbols. We uplift them as equals," he said. 'Every time the Congress brings in a policy for justice, the BJP resists it, not just politically, but ideologically. Because they are uncomfortable with genuine backward class advancement." He also reminded the party that 'AHINDA is not a vote bank. It is the voice of India's conscience." Congress insiders say the entire OBC push—including the Bengaluru Declaration—is part of a larger strategy: to win back OBC votes, revive leadership from within the community, and position the Congress as the party of social justice. For Siddaramaiah, the meeting was also a personal win, protecting his position as a strong OBC face of the Congress, especially at a time when his leadership is under scrutiny within the Karnataka unit. The party also acknowledged that OBC support has steadily drifted to the BJP over the decades and agreed it was time to confront that truth. Leaders discussed rebuilding ground support and learning from past missteps. The Bharatiya Janata Party, however, hit back sharply. Karnataka BJP president BY Vijayendra called the entire exercise a 'Bihar election gimmick" and challenged the Congress to declare Mallikarjun Kharge as its prime ministerial candidate if it truly cared about backward classes. 'They won't—because Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi will never allow it," he said. He also ridiculed Siddaramaiah's social justice pitch, recalling how the Rs 165-crore Kantharaju report was shelved allegedly 'after a phone call from Delhi and advice from Rahul Gandhi." top videos View all 'Where was your concern for the backward classes then?" he asked. Despite the BJP's criticism, the Congress is betting big on the caste census narrative. With 42 top leaders in attendance, including Pradesh Congress Committee (PCC) chiefs, Congress Legislature Party (CLP) leaders and former chief ministers, the Bengaluru Declaration is being positioned as the party's blueprint for its social justice campaign—and a key roadmap for reclaiming lost political ground in the upcoming elections. Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : bengaluru BJP caste congress karnataka OBC view comments Location : Bengaluru, India, India First Published: July 16, 2025, 20:24 IST News politics Congress's OBC Panel Bets Big On Caste Census Narrative, Siddaramaiah At Bengaluru Meeting 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.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Electoral Roll Revision: Why Election Commission Needs To Listen To Supreme Court
Last Updated: Given constitutional mandate of ECI, which gives it full autonomy to conduct polls in a free and fair manner, SC did not interfere in decision of the ECI but gave three suggestions The question of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter's list in Bihar being carried out by the Election Commission of India (ECI) came up for hearing in the Supreme Court (SC) on July 10. The matter was brought to the attention of the apex court by a bunch of Opposition political parties. Their plea was that the timing of the SIR, and the documents that it stipulates to register voters—and those that it excludes—will lead to disenfranchisement of a great many voters in the state, given the short time left for the elections. In my view, the SC handled the petition with admirable restraint and maturity. Given the constitutional mandate of the ECI, which gives it full autonomy to conduct elections in a free and fair manner, including such actions that are consequential to such a mandate, the SC did not interfere in the decision of the ECI. It did not order a stay of proceedings, or issue instructions that would be tantamount to interfering in the functioning of an autonomous institution. However, it did raise three important questions, in terms of advice, query, or clarification. First, it offered a prima facie view that documents like Aadhar, voter ID card and ration cards could be considered by the ECI in identifying a genuine voter. This advice was both crucial and pertinent. The ECI has excluded all three, and substituted them with 11 other documents, including matriculation degree, passport etc. The irony is that all the 11 documents it has enumerated can be obtained only on the basis of an Aadhar card! Moreover, the ECI's demand for voters to furnish proof of the date and place of their birth, and that of their parents, is unprecedented. Anyone familiar with the poverty and illiteracy in Bihar will know that, for the vast majority, these are very difficult to obtain. Less than a quarter of the 13-crore population of the state (of which 8 crore are voters), have birth certificates. For a voter to obtain one for himself or herself, and for his/her parents, is a near insurmountable task, especially given the short time available, and the slow and corrupt local bureaucracy. This is all the more critical since Bihar has the country's largest number of out-migration. Several crore Biharis work outside the state, often in underpaid and miserable conditions, due to lack of jobs in their own state. They may be temporarily not residing in Bihar but are voters in their state. For them to obtain the requisite documentation in absentia, is truly an unwarranted punishment. The second issue flagged by the SC was the timing of the exercise. Again, it is important to stress that the apex court did not transgress the boundaries of the Constitution by questioning the right of the ECI to carry out the SIR. But it did ask whether such an intensive exercise that began only in June this year, could be completed within the short time available until the elections due in October-November. There was, to my mind, great merit in the SC's observation. Just last year, before the parliamentary elections, the ECI had carried out a summary revision of voters list in Bihar. The state election commission had reported that it had conducted this exercise satisfactorily. In fact, the national elections were conducted on this very list. What then was the need to do an SIR just a few months after the summary revision? And even if the ECI felt that it is necessary, could not the work have begun much earlier, giving enough time to voters and evaluators to finish the work with credibility and efficiency? Moreover, the SIR was slated to take place nationally at a time decided by the ECI. Why then was Bihar singled out for it just a few months before elections are due, especially when a summary revision took place only recently? Third, the SC made it clear that, under the Constitution, it is not the mandate of the ECI to determine citizenship. This is a matter under the purview of the Union Home Ministry. The ECI's mandate is to update the voter's list, on the basis of the standard documents available for this purpose on the basis of past practice. But by excluding the Aadhar card, the voting ID card, and ration cards, the ECI had, under another garb, taken upon itself the mistaken responsibility of being the arbiter of proof of citizenship. On this matter, the Constitution is very clear that anyone born in India after 1950 is an Indian citizen. The SC emphasised that it was raising these points because they went 'to the root of democracy and power to vote'. This is the real point. Unfortunately, on several TV debates in which I participated on the date of the SC hearing, spokespersons of political parties—either from the Opposition or the ruling party—seemed to be only concerned with proving which side had 'won' or 'lost'. The question, therefore, is not whether the ECI is impartial or not. Questions have been raised in this regard, but that is an issue that can be debated separately. The question is also not whether the ECI has the powers to conduct the SIR. The SC clearly did not question this mandate. The real question is whether through the manner in which the SIR is being carried out, justice is being done to the Bihari voter. That is the real significance of the advice by the SC to the ECI. Will the ECI act upon it, because what the SC says, even if it does not issue a directive, cannot be taken lightly. One can only hope that the ECI was listening carefully to the SC's observations. view comments 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.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Supreme Court upholds right to share in property of tribal woman's heirs
The Supreme Court on Thursday (July 17, 2025) upheld the right of the legal heirs of a Scheduled Tribe woman to an equal share in their maternal grandfather's ancestral property. 'There appears to be no rational nexus or reasonable classification for only males to be granted succession over the property of their forebears and not women, more so in the case where no prohibition to such effect can be shown to be prevalent as per law… Article 15(1) states that the state shall not discriminate against any person on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. This, along with Articles 38 and 46, points to the collective ethos of the Constitution in ensuring that there is no discrimination against women,' a Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Joymalya Bagchi held. The court said refusing a woman her right of share in a property only deepened gender discrimination. The judgment was based on an appeal filed by the legal heirs who had sought the partition of a property belonging to their maternal grandfather. The judgment authored by Justice Karol observed that customs too, like the law, could not remain stuck in time. 'Others cannot be allowed to take refuge in customs or hide behind them to deprive others of their right,' the court observed. The lower courts had dismissed the plea by the legal heirs saying their mother had no right in the property of her father on the ground that Scheduled Tribes were not governed by the Hindu Succession Act. The trial court and the appellate court had held that there was no evidence that the children of a woman heir were also entitled to property. The top court, allowing the appeal, said denying the woman's heirs a share of their maternal grandfather's property would violate their right to equality.
