Saturday, January 31, 2015

Grant of subsidy to Jute Corporation of India to maintain its infrastructure for MSP operations

The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs, chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, has approved providing financial support to the JCI, it has been decided to provide subsidy to Jute Corporation of India (JCI) on a continuous basis to off-set the losses on account of Minimum Support Price (MSP) operations by JCI. The quantum of subsidy will include the difference between the Purchase and Sale Price of MSP Raw Jute. The quantum of subsidy will also include fixed overhead costs incurred by JCI in maintaining its infrastructure for MSP operation. The reimbursement of fixed overhead cost would be maintained albeit at a reducing amount as per the details given below:

In Rs. Crore

 

2014-15

2015-16

2016-17

2017-18

Annual subsidy/ Grant for maintaining its infrastructure for MSP operations.

55.00

52.11

49.38

46.78

The decision will provide financial support to Jute Corporation of India to protect the interest of the Jute Growers through procurement of Raw Jute under the MSP fixed by the Government of India and also to stabilize the raw jute market for the benefit of the 40 lakh farm families and the jute economy as a whole.

JCI is the Price Support Agency of the Govt. of India for jute to protect the interest of the Jute Growers through procurement of Raw Jute under the MSP fixed by the Govt. of India from time to time and also to stabilize the raw jute market for the benefit of the jute farmers and the jute economy as a whole. To enable JCI to conduct MSP operation and be in preparedness for MSP at the start of every year, yearly grant is provided to the JCI to meet its operational expenditure & overheads for MSP preparedness.

Sunday, May 18, 2014

Educational Scholarship , Shree Vijayalakshmi public trust, Coimbatore

ஸ்ரீ விஜயலட்சுமி பொது நல அறக்கட்டளை கோவை / Shree vijayalakshmi public trust, Coimbatore

vijayalakshmi scholarship கோவை, திருப்பூர், ஈரோடு, நீலகிரி மாவட்ட அரசுப் பள்ளியில் பயின்று 12 ம் வகுப்பு படித்து முடித்து கல்லூரி படிப்பு பயில உதவித் தொகை வழங்கப்படுகிறது. இந்த உதவித்தொகையை பேற தகுதி மதிப்பெண் – 960/1200.

Shree vijayalakshmi public trust, Coimbatore offers to provide scholarship for Higher studies to Government School Students who are hailing from Coimbatore, Tirupur & The Nilgiri District and have secured a minimum mark of 960 out 1200 in plus 2 public exams

அரசுப் பள்ளியில் பயின்று 12 ம் வகுப்பு படித்து முடித்து அரசு நடத்தும் கவுன்சிலிங் மூலம் மருத்துவம் மற்றும் பொறியியல் பயிலும் மணவர்களுக்கு ரூ.25,000/- உதவித்தொகை வழங்கப்படும்

Shree vijayalakshmi public trust, Coimbatore offers to provide scholarship of Rs.25,000/- for Higher studies to Medical and Engineering students who have secured admissions through counseling.

அரசுப் பள்ளியில் பயின்று 12 ம் வகுப்பு படித்து முடித்து கலை மற்றும் அறிவியல் கல்லூரிகளில் செரும் மாணவர்களுக்கு ரூ.12500 /- உதவித்தொகை வழங்கப்படும். உதவித்தொகை பெற மாணவர்கள் உரிய ஆவணங்களை கொடுத்து ஜூன் 9 ம் முதல் ஸ்ரீ விஜயலட்சுமி பொது நல அறக்கட்டளையில் பதிவு செய்து உதவித்தொகையை பெற்றுக்கொள்ளாம்

Shree vijayalakshmi public trust, Coimbatore offers to provide scholarship of Rs.12,500/- for Higher studies to Arts and science college students. The Interested student shall register with the Trust from 09/6/2014

இந்த ஆண்டு (2013 -2014) அரசுப் பள்ளியில் பயின்று 1080 / 1200 மதிப்பெண்கள் பெற்றிருந்தால் முழு கல்லூரி படிப்பிற்கான் தொகை வழங்கப்படும் ( அதிகபட்சம் ரூ.1,00,000 வரை வழங்கப்படும்)

முகவரி:

ஆறுமுகசாமி,

நிறுவனர், ஸ்ரீ விஜயலட்சுமி பொது நல அறக்கட்டளை,

107/ஏ, சென்குப்தா வீதி, ராம் நகர், கோவை

போன்: 0422 – 2207500

Contact:

Arumugasamy,

Shree vijayalakshmi public trust,

107/A, Sengupta street, Ram Nagar,

Coimbatore

Saturday, May 17, 2014

Comments on The Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003

http://archives.deccanchronicle.com/sites/default/files/styles/article_node_view/public/03GROUND%20WATER_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0_0.jpg The Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003  has been repealed by  the Tamil Nadu Ordinance No.4 of 2013 dated 14th September, 2013, where under, the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 is now sought to be repealed. The ordinance is called as the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Repeal Ordinance, 2013. The Explanatory statement reads as under:

"The Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 was enacted taking into consideration the circumstances prevailed in the year 2003. However, in the past 10 years, the following factors have drastically changed the scenario:-

(i) Certain definitions like marginal and small farmers, etc., have not been clearly defined to carry out the purport of the Act preventing groundwater drawal for Agricultural purposes and thereby causing hardship to farmers.

(ii) The people at large are to be ensured minimum potable water from groundwater sources when other sources are not sufficient especially in a drought affected year.

(iii) The provisions in the Act require that all individuals should be registered with the Groundwater Authority and licence should be obtained by all persons having over 1 Horse Power motor. If the Act in the present form was implemented and groundwater was not allowed to be tapped, it would have led to a public outcry.

(iv) Since 2003, the Municipal Corporations like Chennai, Coimbatore, Madurai, etc., have expanded, Piped water supply is not adequately available in the extended portions. Therefore, for supply to households by the Corporations and Private lorries, tapping of groundwater is being resorted to. As per the Act, a permit has to be obtained for transport of groundwater by means of lorry, trailer etc., from the notified areas for any purpose. This would result in unnecessary difficulties to the general public as each and every lorry or trailer in the State has to obtain a permit from the State Groundwater Authority even for supply of drinking water causing difficulties to the general public.

(v) The manner in which the drawal of groundwater has to be regulated for construction of multistoried buildings and for commercial exploitation of water, where water is used as raw material has not been addressed in the Act."

The  Madras High court has issued directions based on government  G.O.Ms.No.52, Public Works  Department, dated 02.03.2012 directing the general public approach the authorities of the Public Works Department for necessary approval  for commercial usage of ground water based on the category to which they fall.

The power of Revenue Department has been taken away and they no longer can take cognizance of illegal ground water trade.  Even after this judgement may revenue authorities with out any legal mandate have taken action with the help of police.

<<click to download full judgement>>

<< click to download  G.O.Ms.No.52, Public Works (R2) Department, dated 02.03.2012 >>

Judgement :

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

Dated: 18.09.2013

Coram

The Honourable Mrs.JUSTICE CHITRA VENKATARAMAN

and

The Honourable Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

Writ Appeal Nos.923 to 926 of 2009, W.P.Nos.23116 of 2006, 23896 to 23900 of 2006, 4711 of 2004 and 12375 of 2008 & Connected Miscellaneous Petitions

Writ Appeal Nos.923 to 926 of 2009:

New Tirupur Area Development Corporation Ltd.,

represented by its Authorised Signatory

having its office at 'Anurag',

No.15, Murray's Gate Road,

Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. .... Appellant in the above W.A.s

Vs.

1. Tmt. K.Poomani .... Respondent in W.A.Nos.923 & 924/2009

1. Sri.K.Paramasivam .... Respondent in W.A.Nos.925 & 926/2009

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

Tiruppur, Coimbatore District.

3. The Inspector of Police,

Tiruppur Rural Police Station,

Coimbatore District.

4. The Secretary,

Government of Tamil Nadu,

Public Works Department (Groundwater),

Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

.... Respondents in W.A.Nos.923 to 926 of 2009

5. KRNR Aqua Industries,

rep. by its Proprietor,

Opp. Jaya Theatre,

Mallaooppampatti Village,

Ayyamperumampatti Post,

Salem 636 005.

(R4 impleaded vide order dated 28.7.2009,

R5 impleaded vide order dated 1.7.2013 &

R6 impleaded vide order dated 18.9.2013)

.... Respondents in W.A.No.923 of 2009

6. M/s.Kamala Corporation,

rep. by its Proprietor,

S.Pazhamalai, No.353, Main Road,

Pennadam 606 105

Cuddalore District.

(R4 impleaded vide order dated 28.7.2009,

R5 impleaded vide order dated 1.7.2013 &

R6 impleaded vide order dated 18.9.2013)

.... Respondents in W.A.Nos.923 & 926 of 2009

APPEALs under Clause XV of the Letters Patent against the order dated 12.1.2009 made in W.P.M.P.No.2 of 2008 in W.P.No.25352 of 2008; W.P.No.25352 of 2008; W.P.M.P.No.2 of 2008 in W.P.No.25353 of 2008; W.P.No.25353 of 2008 on the file of this Court.

Writ Petition Nos.23116, 23896 to 23900 of 2006:

Tmt.Rukmani .... Petitioner in W.P.No.23116 of 2006

N.Eswaramoorthy .... Petitioner in W.P.No.23896 of 2006

N.Manonmani .... Petitioner in W.P.No.23897 of 2006

K.Narayanasamy .... Petitioner in W.P.No.23898 of 2006

O.Subramanian .... Petitioner in W.P.No.23899 of 2006

Tiruppur Water Lorry Owner Association,

Regd. No.3/2006,

73/3, Thanner Pandal Colony,

Avinashi Road, Tiruppur 641 652

rep. by its Chairman

R.M.Vadivel

.... Petitioner in W.P.No.23900 of 2006

Vs.

1. The Commissioner,

Tiruppur Municipality,

Tiruppur.

2. The Collector,

Coimbatore District,

Coimbatore.

.... Respondents in the above W.Ps

PETITIONs under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from obstructing the supply of water taking from the borewell of the petitioners situated in S.No.96/2B2, Ganapathypalayam Village, Palladam Taluk; S.No.518 in 19A Rakkiapalayam Village, Majara Vijayapuram, Tiruppur Taluk; S.No.75/2 in Naranapuram Village Palladam Taluk; S.No.455/3D in 19A, Rakkiapalayam, Nallur Village, Tiruppur Taluk; S.No.369/1B, Ganapathypalayam Village, Palladam Taluk, through tanker lorries for domestic and industrial purposes in and around Tiruppur and Palladam by the petitioners.

Writ Petition No.4711 of 2004:

N.Ramamurthy

.... Petitioner

Vs.

1. The District Collector,

Coimbatore District,

Coimbatore.

2. The Tahsildar,

Palladam Taluk, Palladam,

Coimbatore District.

3. The Asst. Engineer,

Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,

Kulathupalayam, Palladam Taluk,

Coimbatore District.

.... Respondents

PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from preventing the petitioner from taking water from his borewell situated in S.F.no.54/3 of Karaipudur Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District and transporting the water through the lorry to his Banian factory viz., 'Saranya Colours' near the Tiruppur situated in Kunnagalapalaym, Chinnakarai, Arulpalayam Post, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District.

Writ Petition No.12375 of 2008:

Appusamy Gounder .... Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,

Tiruppur, Coimbatore District,

2. The Inspector of Police,

Palladam Police Station,

Palladam Taluk,

Coimbatore District.

3. New Tirupur Area Development Corporation Ltd.,

represented by its Authorised Signatory

having its office at 'Anurag',

No.15, Murray's Gate Road,

Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. .... Respondents

PETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from obstructing the supply of water taking from the open well of the petitioner situated in S.No.386 in 30, Karaipudur Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District for domestic and industrial purposes in and around Tiruppur and Palladam by the petitioner.

For Appellant in W.A.Nos.923 to 926 of 2009: Mr.S.Raghunathan

For R1 in W.A.Nos.923 to 926 of 2009 and for Petitioner in W.P.Nos.23116 of 2006, 23896 to 23900 of 2006, 4711 of 2004 and 12375 of 2008 : Mr.S.Doraisamy

For R2 to R4 in W.A.Nos.923 to 926 of 2009 & For Respondents in W.P.Nos.23116 of 2006 23896 to 23900 of 2006, 4711 of 2004 and 12375 of 2008 :Mr.A.L.Somayaji, Advocate General Assisted by Mr.R.Ravichandran, AGP Mr.P.Karthikeyan, G.A.

For R5 in W.A.No.923 of 2009: Mr.A.S.Rajkumar

For R6 in W.A.Nos.923 & 926 of 2009: Mrs.Hema Sampath, S.C. For M/s.K.V.Muthuvisakan

-----------------

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.)

The present Writ Appeals are filed by New Tirupur Area Development Corporation Limited, who sought to implead itself in Writ Petitions filed by one Poomani in W.P.No.23532 of 2008 and one Paramasivam in W.P.No.25353 of 2008. The said Writ Petitions were filed before this Court for issuance of writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents therein from obstructing the supply of water taking from the open well of the petitioners through tanker lorries for domestic and drinking purposes in and around Tiruppur and Palladam by the petitioners.

2. Learned single Judge rejected the impleading petitions filed by the Writ Appellant taking the view that for deciding the issue, the presence of the impleading party was not at all necessary. Thus, the petitions to implead the Writ Appellant were dismissed. Aggrieved by this, Writ Appeal Nos.925 and 926 of 2009 are filed before this Court. Apart from this, the Writ Appellant also filed Writ Appeals as against the main order passed in W.P.Nos.25352 and 25353 of 2008, wherein learned single Judge, by order dated 12.01.2009 held that in the absence of any order issued by the Government under Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act 2003, neither the Revenue Authorities nor the Police Authorities got any power to obstruct the petitioner from drawing ground water from open wells and bore wells and transporting the same. Learned single Judge also pointed out that the order would not stand in the way of the Government issuing appropriate order under Section 9 of the said Act.

3. It is seen from the averment made in the affidavit filed by Paramasivam - Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.25353 of 2005 that on account of the development of knit wear industries resulting in serious set back in the agricultural activity in and around Tiruppur and leading to the shortage of manpower, the petitioner and other similarly placed persons had started selling water to the dyeing factories. However, with the formation of New Tiruppur Area Development Corporation Limited, wherein a Scheme was introduced for drawing water from Bhavani river to Tiruppur for the industrial purpose only, the petitioner felt that his business got offended. Apart from that, the introduction of the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 to regulate the development and management of groundwater, which was yet to be notified, was further seen as an obstruction to the business. He contended that for sinking a well or bore well, no permission was necessary from the authorities. However, on instruction from the Revenue Divisional Officer, the Inspector of Police started obstructing the lorries taking water from the well and supplying the same to the dyeing factories. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court for a writ of mandamus to forbear the respondents from obstructing the supply of water taken from the open well of the petitioner.

4. In the background of the said contention and with the New Tiruppur Area Development Corporation Limited not being a main party in the Writ Petition, the present appellant filed a petition in M.P.No.2 of 2008 contending that the impleading party was created as a special purpose vehicle under the support of Government of Tamil Nadu to implement the project on drawing water from Bhavani River to Tiruppur, which would not only be beneficial for the public at large and to the industries located in and around Tiruppur but also for the supply of drinking water to the Tiruppur township as well as to the villages in and around Tiruppur. Since the project was implemented at enormous cost, the petitioner thought it fit to move the Court for impleading itself in the Writ Petitions. The appellant contended that on account of the use of groundwater for industrial purpose, the purpose for which the impleading party was constituted would be totally defeated; hence, the appellant had to be impleaded as party and heard in the Writ Petition.

5. As already pointed out, learned single Judge rejected the impleading petitions. The appellant filed Writ Appeals against this order and as well as against the order in the Writ Petitions stating that the Authorities had no jurisdiction to obstruct anybody from drawing water. It is seen further that this Court passed an interim order on 31.01.2011 in the Writ Appeals, wherein the Division Bench of this Court directed the State Government not to allow any person to draw and sell the groundwater until the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2013 was notified. This led to the impleading of the sixth respondent M/s.Kamala Corporation in the Writ Appeals. Since one of the contentions raised by the Writ Petitioner and other impleading party related to the non-notification of the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 and hence on the jurisdiction of the Authorities to obstruct anyone from drawing water from the wells to trade therein, we requested the learned Advocate General to appear in this matter to get proper instructions. Accordingly, learned Advocate General has placed before this Court the copy of the Tamil Nadu Ordinance No.4 of 2013 dated 14th September, 2013, where under, the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 is now sought to be repealed. The ordinance is called as the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Repeal Ordinance, 2013. The Explanatory statement reads as under:

"The Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 was enacted taking into consideration the circumstances prevailed in the year 2003. However, in the past 10 years, the following factors have drastically changed the scenario:-

(i) Certain definitions like marginal and small farmers, etc., have not been clearly defined to carry out the purport of the Act preventing groundwater drawal for Agricultural purposes and thereby causing hardship to farmers.

(ii) The people at large are to be ensured minimum potable water from groundwater sources when other sources are not sufficient especially in a drought affected year.

(iii) The provisions in the Act require that all individuals should be registered with the Groundwater Authority and licence should be obtained by all persons having over 1 Horse Power motor. If the Act in the present form was implemented and groundwater was not allowed to be tapped, it would have led to a public outcry.

(iv) Since 2003, the Municipal Corporations like Chennai, Coimbatore, Madurai, etc., have expanded, Piped water supply is not adequately available in the extended portions. Therefore, for supply to households by the Corporations and Private lorries, tapping of groundwater is being resorted to. As per the Act, a permit has to be obtained for transport of groundwater by means of lorry, trailer etc., from the notified areas for any purpose. This would result in unnecessary difficulties to the general public as each and every lorry or trailer in the State has to obtain a permit from the State Groundwater Authority even for supply of drinking water causing difficulties to the general public.

(v) The manner in which the drawal of groundwater has to be regulated for construction of multistoried buildings and for commercial exploitation of water, where water is used as raw material has not been addressed in the Act."

6. Paragraph No.2 of the Explanatory Statement further states that the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003 has to be comprehensively changed taking into account the present demand, need and supply. Consequently, while repealing the Tamil Nadu Groundwater (Development and Management) Act, 2003, the note further expressed its decision to regulate the drawing of water on commercial basis.

7. Learned senior counsel appearing for the impleading party viz., M/s.Kamala Corporation in Writ Appeal Nos.923 and 926 of 2009 placed before us G.O.(Ms) No.52, Public Works (R2) Department dated 02.03.2012. The letter written by the Chief Engineer, State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data Centre, Tharamani to the Secretary to Government dated 02.07.2013 points out that it is an executive order passed in the interests of the State, for equitable availability of groundwater to every one and all the water connecting Departments were consulted on this subject.

8. On a reading of G.O.Ms.No.52, Public Works (R2) Department, dated 02.03.2012, we find that the Chief Engineer, State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data Centre, Tharamani had submitted certain proposals to the Government for notifying blocks based on the categorization made as on March, 2009 for all the Districts in Tamil Nadu on the exploitation of groundwater. Based on the recommendation, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.52, Public Works (R2) Department dated 02.03.2012 approving the categorization of over exploited blocks; critical blocks; semi critical blocks; safe blocks and saline/poor quality blocks. Thus, all the over exploited blocks and critical blocks are notified as 'A' category stage of groundwater extraction is 90% and above and all the semi critical and safe blocks are notified as 'B' category stage of groundwater extraction is below 89%. The Government further notified in paragraph Nos.9 to 12 as follows:

"9. The Government further direct that no schemes should be formulated in over exploited and critical blocks Notified as A category blocks. In Semi Critical and Safe blocks Notified as B category blocks, all the schemes should be formulated through State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data Centre of Water Resources Department and the Chief Engineer / State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data Centre will issue No Objection Certificate for Ground Water Clearance.

10. The Government further direct to exclude the Ground Water drawal for domestic purpose by individual household; domestic infrastructure project (Housing); Governments Drinking Water Supply Schemes and; non water based industries, (i.e. the industries which do not require and use water, either as raw material or for other processing). The Chief Engineer, State Ground and Surface Water Resources Data Centre will permit for domestic use of water by this non water based industries by issuing No Objection Certificate based on the hydro geological conditions. The list of non water based industries will be issued by the Industries Department of Government of Tamil Nadu separately.

11. The Government further direct that appropriate rain water harvesting and Artificial Recharge Schemes shall be carried out in the catefories viz. Over exploited, Critical, Semi Critical and Safe blocks of Tamil Nadu. While carrying out the above schemes, priority shall be given to marginal quality and bad quality areas so as to avoid further deterioration.

12. The Government further direct that all the schemes and proposals based on Ground Water will have to be adhered the Government orders and conditions as detailed in the Annexure II of this order."

9. Thus, in the background of the Government Order, in exercise of executive power and which has nothing to do with the passing of the repealing of the Act, we feel, the proper course herein would be to set aside the order of the learned single Judge in the Writ Petitions as well as the order rejecting the impleading petitions and direct the parties to approach the authorities of the Public Works Department for necessary approval based on the category to which they fall. Accordingly, the order dated 12.01.2009 made in W.P.Nos.25352 and 25353 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.2 and 2 of 2008 stands set aside. We make it clear that even with the repealing of the Act, G.O.Ms.No.52 Public Works (R2) Department dated 02.03.2012 will govern the interests of the parties and the State in the matter of regulating the business of the Writ Appellant herein.

10. In view of the order passed setting aside the orders of the learned single Judge passed in the Miscellaneous Petitions as well as in the Writ Petitions, all the Writ Appeals and the Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of what we have stated in the preceding paragraphs. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Index :Yes (C.V.,J) (T.S.S.,J)

NOSJSS law journal. An open source judgement search system

- See more at: http://indianlegalclub.blogspot.in/2014/05/public-works-department-authorised-to.html#sthash.QTtpO7T1.dpuf

Sunday, September 16, 2012

கூடங்குளம் அணு உலை போராட்டத்தை எதிர்ப்பவரா நீங்கள்?

கூடங்குளம் அணு உலை போராட்டத்தை எதிர்ப்பவரா நீங்கள்? இதோ உங்களுக்காக ஓர் செய்தி, உலகின் அணுசக்தி உற்பத்தியில் மூன்றாம் hindu news on japan energy planஇடம் பிடித்துள்ள நாடு ஜப்பான். அது (ஜப்பான்) ஒரு முக்கிய முடிவை எடுத்துள்ளது, அதாவது 2040ல் அணு உலைகளே இல்லாத நாடாக மாற்ற திட்டமிட்டுள்ளது. ஏன் தொழில்நுற்பத்தில் வளர்ச்சிவுற்ற நாடு இந்த முடிவை எடுக்க வேண்டும்? சற்று சிந்தியுங்கள்….

Saturday, February 11, 2012

EC censures Salman Khurshid’s Election promises of 9% quota

salam ec censure war 11 feb 2012

Community certificate form in Tamil

image It has been found that  the community certificate application form that are available in tamilnadu revenue department website (http://www.tn.gov.in/appforms/cert-community.pdf ) is an out date one so Kindly click the below  link to download the right community certificate application form, This form is in Tamil and applicable fro Tamilnadu only.

Click to download the right community certificate application form in Tamil

Monday, February 6, 2012

At the doorsteps of the PM

image The country has witnessed a lot of large scale scams in the recent years especially the ones during the UPA government. The UPA has been defending itself with PM as the shield. The UPA government has made some very wrong moves when it comes to prevention or curbing of legal protest by ordinary citizens against the corruption. The UPA  led government  has been projecting Prime Minister as the man of impeccable integrity.  may be he is a honest person but  is he a responsible Prime minister and doesn't he hold any moral responsibility for the scam that took place under his tenure as the prime minister or head of the government.

 

Appointment of Chief Vigilance commissioner:

The prime minister and the home minister went ahead to appoint Mr.P.J.Thomas as the Chief Vigilance commissioner of central vigilance Commission despite opposition from the leader of opposition. The matter was then taken to court and the court held that the appointment as null and void since there was a corruption case pending against Mr.P.J.Thomas. The Government first claim that there was no information provide to prime minister office and home ministry regarding the pending corruption case and claimed innocent but later in the parliament PM accept the responsibility for appointment.

 

2G Scam:

The 2G scam is a well know scam in the country, did the Prime minister act responsibly enough to prevent the loss of revenue to the government though he acted prudently during the issue of  3G licensing. The PM had several time defended Mr.Raja the then telecom minister. PM also act imprudently by not making a decision on sanction for the crime prosecution of Mr.A.Raja the then minister of his cabinet. PM could have denied sanction but his failure to take decision is what makes it be foul play. The PM has sought legal opinion and upon obtaining legal opinion he should have made a decision and should have communicated it to the petitioner/applicant.The whole story in nut shell is he failed to prevent the scam, later defended the licensing decision and Mr.Raja, failed decide on sanction for prosecution application  and no action was taken against the telecom company which benefitted from 2G licensing scam-

 

Devas – Antrix S-Band spectrum Contract:

Antrix , the marketing wing of ISRO gave way a rare spectrum at throw away price for a company called devas for a period of 20 year. What transpired this contract and who were all behind the deal is still under probe.  It’s to be noted that the Antrix is under the control of the PMO office  and murky deal right under the Prime ministers office  is yet an another failure of Prime minister.

 

Lack of leadership:

The Prime minster in case of the Lokpal protest by Shri.Anna hazare and anticorruption protest by Shri. Baba ram dev has show lack leadership. he has allowed other legally qualified ministers of his cabinet to handle such sensitive issue. Those ministers tried to tackle the issue insensitively by adopting legal solution to a political problem there by the country was brought to stand still for few days. The prime minister then promised to introduce and pass the bill during the winter session (2012) but failed to pass the bill. He clearly lacked the leadership in this particular case of Lokpal and anticorruption protest.

 

All the above mentioned scams and issue straight away lead to the doorsteps of the PM’s office. How can a prudent man after all these scams and incidents still believe that he is a responsible prime minister though Dr.Manmohan singh has very good personal record as an honest, hard working, straight forward and simple person but as prime minister of the country has he delivered, i leave it to you to decide ….

AIADMK heading for a disastrous 2014 Elections

image AIADMK  had won the 2011 state election by a huge and an unexpected margin. Thereafter coming to power with lot of promises and hopes, has so far let down the people of Tamilnadu. Some of  the  acts  and behaviours which is unpleasing and will certainly reduce the chance of winning the 2014 Parliament elections.  below are the list of unpleasing acts and behaviour,

Important issues that will affect the electoral prospects of AIADMK:

  1. Electricity cuts : The electoral promise of providing uninterrupted electricity supply has so far not been met. In fact in recent past the electricity cuts as long as 6 to 7 hrs a day.
  2. Hike in Bus fare and milk cost: This has hit very hard on the lower income and middle income class very badly. This single factor could led to very disastrous 2014 election results for AIADMK.
  3. Lacks a clear stand on Kudamkulam nuclear power plant: The state government is not clear with its stand on the power plant. it neither opposes or

Important issues which has brought down the image of AIADMK:

  1. Samacheer Kalvi: To start with The AIADMK’s stand on samacheer kalvi and legal battle will caused delay  in re-opening of the schools, especially class 10. The students and parents had lot of odd / unpleasant times due this.
  2. Land crabbing cases – All most all ex-ministers of DMK has been arrested under the land grabbing charges. This is certainly an act of vengeance which certainly casts a bad shadow on the party.
  3. Suspension of leader of opposition: Ugly spat with the leader of opposition and the former ally of AIADMK has certainly brought down the image and certainly makes AIADMK an unreliable ally. To make matters worst the leader of opposition was suspended for 10 days in a very hasty manner probably to the power of the AIADMK

One may still argue that 2014 election are quite a long time from now to predict the possible out comes, yes it’s quite little long from now but the recent activities show us that it’s quite very imminent that a marginal or huge defeat is waiting on AIADMK’S way unless there is a drastic change in it’s approach.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Can Chidambaram escape the 2G trial

image Today the Supreme court has pronounced a very important judgement in the 2G spectrum allocation case. It’s has given some sort for breathing time for Mr.Chidambaram. The supreme court in it’s order has cancelled 121 licenses issued to telecom companies under the UPA-1 regime. This is a big blow to the UPA and to Congress and DMK in particular. Now the question is will UPA yet again face another embarrassment, defending Mr.Raja back fired at them and now defending Mr.Chidambaram  may back fire at the UPA government. The supreme court has decided not decide on inclusion of Mr.Chidambaram in the 2G trial and left it to the CBI court to decide upon the matter. February 4th is the day on which CBI trial court is expected to deliver it’s judgement on Mr.Chidambaram inclusion in the 2G trial.

What are the possible scenario:

Scenario – I : Inclusion on Mr. P.Chidambaram: 

In this case the Mr.Chidambaram will be left with very few choice. He will for sure will appeal against the decision but there will be lot more chances of the appeal being dismissed rather than being allowed in the high court or in the supreme court.

Scenario – 2 : Non- Inclusion on Mr. P.Chidambaram: (Most likely scenario)

Well in this case there will be an appeal as against non inclusion of Mr.P.Chidambaram and the appeal will be most probably be allowed. The chances of succeeding the appeal is predicated based on today’s judgement on 2G case by supreme court. This scenario is the mostly likely because this would allow time to Mr.Chidambaram and lower court may try to put the ball in the superior courts to decide on this critical matter. It’s seems form today’s judgement that Mr.P.Chidambaram is most likely to face trial and likely to lose the Home Ministry.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

GoM recommendations on corruption

The Government has accepted the recommendations made by the Group of Ministers (GoM) on Corruption in its First Report, aimed at fast-tracking of cases against public servants accused of corruption. The report was accepted on September 6, 2011.

The Government had, on 6th January. 2011. constituted a Group of Ministers (GoM) to consider measures that can be taken by the Government to tackle corruption, under the chairmanship of Union Finance Minister, Shri Pranab Mukherjee. The terms of reference of the GoM were as under:-

(i) To consider all measures, including legislative and administrative, to tackle corruption and improve transparency;

(ii) In particular, the GoM may consider and advise on the following:-

(a) State funding of elections:

(b) Fast tracking of all cases of public servants accused of corruption:

(c) Ensuring full transparency in public procurement and contracts. including enunciation of public procurement standards and a public procurement policy:

(d) Relinquishing discretionary powers enjoyed by Ministers at the Centre:

(e) Introduction of an open and competitive system of exploiting natural resources:

(f) Amendment to Article 311 of the Constitution to provide for summary proceedings in cases of grave misdemeanor or blatant corruption by public servants: and

(g) Consideration of relevance/need for section 6(A) of the Delhi Special Establishment Act, 1946.

The GOM has so far held five meetings on 21.1.2011, 14.2.2011, 16.3.2011, 16.06.201 1 and 06.09.2011. Based on the deliberations in its first three meetings, the Group of Ministers had submitted its First Report to the Government in April. 201 1. After due consideration by DoPT, Cabinet Secretariat and PMO, the Government has, on Tuesday, accepted the recommendations made by the GoM in its First Report with minor changes.

These decisions, which cover items (ii)(b), (ii)(f) and (ii)(g) of the term of reference (ToR) of the GOM, are as follows:-

(a) Dispensing with the Second Stage Advice of the Central Vigilance Commission. (However, in those cases where consultation with UPSC is not required under the extant rules, the second stage consultation with CVC should continue.)

(b) Departments/ Ministries should primarily use serving officers as Inquiry Officers (IDs) & Presenting Officers (POs) and in important cases, they may request CVC to appoint their Commissioners for Departmental Inquiries (GDIs) as lOs. CVC to maintain a panel of lOs/POs from amongst retired Government officers after due process of screening and empanelment. These officers could be engaged on advice of the CVC.

(c) In all cases where the Investigating Agency has requested sanction for prosecution, it will be mandatory for the competent authority to take a decision within a period of 3 months from receipt of request, and pass a Speaking Order, giving reasons for the decision. In the event of refusal of sanction to prosecute, the competent authority will have to submit its order including reasons for refusal, to the next higher authority for information within 7 days. Wherever the Minister-in-charge of the Department is the competent authority and he decides to deny the permission, it would be incumbent on the Minister to submit, within 7 days of passing such order denying the permission, to the Prime Minister for information. Further, it will be the responsibility of the Secretary of each Department/Ministry to monitor all cases where a request has been made for permission to prosecute. Secretaries should submit a certificate every month to the Cabinet Secretary to the effect that no case is pending for more than 3 months and, in case any such request is pending, the reasons for such pendency and the level where it is pending may also be explained.

(d) Expediting the setting up of Special CBI Courts already sanctioned by Central Government, by actively pursuing the matter with the State Governments;

(e) Setting up of a Committee headed by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court and having as its Members, a retired CVC, retired Director of CBI and another person of impeccable reputation who could be drawn from the Civil Society, to look into old CBI cases which are pending for more than 10 years, particularly those under the Prevention of Corruption Act and suggest ways for their speedy disposal, including withdrawal, if need be.

(f) Strengthening of vigilance administration of Central Ministries/Departments and, in particular, the strengthening of vigilance wing of the Department of Personnel and Training, with requisite manpower to ensure effective monitoring of vigilance matters.

(g)Continuation of minor penalty proceedings against public servants even after retirement with provision for a ceiling of 10% cut in pension for a period not exceeding five years. Such cut in pension in minor penalty proceedings would, however, be non-mandatory.

(h)Change in the present penalty of 'compulsory retirement' (with full pension) to 'compulsory retirement with a cut in pension upto 20%".

Necessary follow up action for implementing these decisions, by way of amendment of rules, etc., is expected to be taken shortly.

As regards relinquishment of discretionary powers enjoyed by the Ministers at the Centre, the GoM had reviewed the information furnished by various Ministries/Departments and had observed that the exercise of such discretionary powers, such as nomination of members/experts to various boards, etc, were generally found to be governed by guidelines in most of the Ministries/Departments and has recommended that wherever such guidelines have not been framed, clear cut guidelines for exercise of these discretionary powers be framed by the concerned Ministry/Department and put in the public domain.

In another significant development, the GoM, in its meeting held on Tuesday, 06-09-2011, considered the recommendations made by a Committee of Secretaries on the Report submitted by an Expert Committee on "Public Procurement" and accepted the recommendations of the COS to come out with an all encompassing "Public Procurement Bill" in the Parliament by the end of the current year, as promised by the Hon'ble Prime Minister from the ramparts of Red Fort on 15th August, 2011.

The GoM further recommended that the Law may contain the broad principles governing public procurements, ensuring transparency and accountability but at same time providing for due independence and flexibility for the procuring agencies. The GoM further suggested that the rule making exercise may be undertaken in parallel with the drafting of the proposed legislation covering different aspects of procurement of goods, services, pharma drugs and works. The GoM also suggested that the exercise of framing of rules and standardisation of documents for PPP projects may also be undertaken concurrently, so that the system is in readiness and is prepared for implementation of the new legislation without any loss of time.

*****

RS/-

(Release ID :75965)