Guwahati HC ordered to pay unemployment allowance

The Guwahati High Court, Imphal Bench in a ruling by Justice T Vaiphei has upheld an earlier decree of the Imphal East MGNREGS Deputy Ombudsman for releasing unemployment allowance to 13 Job Card holders of Ucheckon Nongchup Gram Panchayat, who had applied for unemployment allowance.

According to a Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) statement, the Guwahati High Court, Imphal Bench in its ruling on August 30 directed to comply with the award issued by the Deputy Ombudsman, within two months and to release the unemployment allowance to be paid to the 13 Job Card holders.

With the passing of the said judgment and order, the MGNREGS authority in Manipur is compelled to pay the unemployment allowance for their failure to give employment to the job card holders, said the HRLN statement while pointing out that prior to passing of the said judgment and order, getting unemployment allowance in Manipur was a distant dream despite the fact that unemployment allowance is a guaranteed right under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 .

The said Writ Petition is one of the exceptional cases in Manipur in approaching the Court for non payment of unemployment allowance by the Job Card holders under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 .

Under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, Manipur, which has been framed by the Government of Manipur under Section 4 of the MGNREGA, every job card holder is entitled to get unemployment allowance as and when the authority concerned failed to provide employment within 15 days from the date of submission of application for work by the Job Card Holder, HRLN explained.

With regard to the present case, it is informed that in November 2010, 13 Job Card holders of Uchekon Nongchup Gram Panchayat submitted their application for work under NREGS, Manipur to the authority of Uchekon Nongchup Gram Panchayat.

However, the said Job Card Holders were not provided employment within the stipulated period of time and as such they reportedly approached the Panchayat Secretary of the Gram Panchayat concerned on December 24, 2010 by submitting separate applications seeking unemployment allowances for failure to provide them employment.

Since then the 13 individuals have been waiting for unemployment allowance but the same was not released.

Subsequently, on January 15, 2011 the said Job Card holders submitted individual complaints to the Deputy Ombudsman, MGNREGS, Imphal East District for taking necessary action so as to enable them get their unemployment allowances.

Consequently, on February 14, the Deputy Ombudsman disposed of their complaints by a common Award thereby directing the Programme Officer concerned to pay the unemployment allowances to the said 13 Job Card holders.

However, the authority concerned failed to provide the unemployment allowances to them inspite of decree of the Deputy Ombudsman resulting in the 13 individuals approaching the Guwahati High court to deliver justice.

The Respondents listed in the Writ Petition include the State of Manipur through the Commissioner, (Rural Development and Panchayati Raj) to the Government of Manipur; the District Programme Co-ordinator, Imphal East District, Manipur; the Programme Officer, Imphal East II CD Block; and the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, New Delhi (Proforma Respondent) .

The said Writ Petition was filed at the active initiative of Human Rights Law Network (Manipur), the statement issued by its director Meihoubam Rakesh added.

Read more...

No Adverse Impact on Society by Legalising Gay Sex - Gay rights activists say

Gay rights activists today argued before the Supreme Court that decriminalising gay sex has not made any negative impact on society as apprehended by people opposing homosexuality.

"Almost nine months have passed since the judgement was announced and no harm has been caused to Indian society or culture or traditions," Naz Foundation, an NGO on whose petition the Delhi High Court had legalised gay sex, said in its reply.

The NGO opposed the contention that legalisation of gay sex would result in spreading of AIDS in the society and submitted that there is no scientific basis for it.

The NGO filed its response against various petitions filed by anti-gay rights activists and religious organisations seeking quashing of July 2 landmark verdict of the High Court legalising gay sex between consenting adults in private, which was earlier a criminal offence punishable with up to life imprisonment.

"Homosexuality is not a concept alien to Indian culture. In fact, it has been an inherent part of the Indian culture and civilisation," the NGO claimed, adding "criminalisation of sexuality, on the other hand, including homosexuality, is alien to Indian culture."

The apex court had earlier issued a notice to the Centre on a petition filed by a Christian body, a disciple of Yoga guru Ramdev and a astrologer Suresh Kumar Kaushal seeking a stay on the High Court verdict legalising gay sex on the ground it will have a catastrophic effect on the society's moral fabric.

All the petitioners have sought setting aside of the July two High Court verdict legalising gay sex between consenting adults in private.

Read more...

Delhi HC to hear first petition under Right to Education

A class VI girl has moved the Delhi High Court against her school’s decision which chose to expel her because she failed in her final examinations and has asked for the court’s intervention to get her studies resumed in the same school.

Accusing St Xavier’s Senior Secondary School for violating her fundamental Right to education, the VI class student Suman Bhati has alleged that the school expelled her on the grounds that she failed in her final examination. Now she has no place to go her father Naresh Bhati alleged.

The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution in the Delhi High Court yesterday by the lawyers Ashok Agarwal and Ms Kusum on behalf of Bhati against St Xavier’s Senior Secondary School for violating the child’s fundamental rights as well as violating the law of Right to Education and also against the Director of Education, GNCT for failing to take action against the school in accordance with law to allow the girl to continue her studies in the school.

The petition has alleged that the action on the part of the Xavier’s Senior Secondary School against the student for expelling her from the school on March 17, 2010 is illegal, anti-child, arbitrary, unjust, punitive in nature, unethical discriminatory, unconstitutional, violative of the provisions of the Delhi School Education Act, 1973, The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, hit by the provisions of Article 14 (right to equality), Article 21 (right to life with dignity), Article 21-A (right to education) and Article 38 (right to social justice) of the Constitution of India read with UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989).

The petitioner has submitted that she has been a regular student of the respondent-school since KG. While the petitioner was studying in class IV, she failed in the examination and was detained in the same class. Thereafter, she qualified the Class IV examination and promoted to Class V.

On March 27, 2010, the Principal handed over the marks-sheet of Class VI to the petitioner’s father with the following remark: detained and withdrawn. It was also told to the parent verbally that the student had been removed from the school from now on. Mr Bhati requested the Principal of the school to not to remove his daughter as it would ruin the future of his child. He also submitted in written to the Principal with a request to permit her child to continue her studies in the school.

However, the principal remained adamant throughout and declined to accept the request of the parent.

Mr Bhati then approached Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group with a request to help the child. It is submitted that the Social Jurist sent a phonogram on March 31 to the school followed by a representation requesting the school to forthwith allow the petitioner to continue her studies in the school. However, no response has been received so far, Mr Agarwal said.

Mr Agarwal in the petition said, it is unfortunate that in a time when the Government is coming up with laws, schemes and policies to encourage the girl child to study more, here is a school that is trying to jeopardize a class VI girl’s future by expelling her from the school. It is highly unjust as well as illegal to expel a student who wishes to study further and make her career, he said.

The petition will come up for hearing before Justice Kailash Gambhir on Arpil 5.

Read more...