CBI files additional documents in IRCTC case
New Delhi, May 9: The CBI on Wednesday filed an additional 20,000 pages documents in the 2006 IRCTC hotels maintenance contract case against former Railway Minister Lalu Prasad, his wife Rabri Devi, son Tejashwi Yadav, including others.
The additional document which was filed before Special Judge Arvind Kumar is a part of the chargesheet. The court has listed the matter for June 1 for further hearing on consideration on the chargesheet.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in April filed chargesheet against 12 people and two companies.
Lalu Prasad, his wife and former Bihar Chief Minister Rabri Devi, his son and former Bihar Deputy Chief Minister Tejashwi Yadav, former MD of IRCTC P.K. Goel, Sujata Hotels directors Vinay and Vijay Kochhar, Sarala Gupta -- wife of Prem Chand Gupta -- a Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MP, and Lara Projects LLP have been charge-sheeted.
Besides, the CBI charge-sheet also named Additional Member of the Railway Board B.K. Agarwal, who was then Group General Manager (GGM) of the Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation (IRCTC).
The CBI also charge-sheeted former GGM of IRCTC V.K. Asthana, R.K. Gogia -- then GGM (company secretary) of IRCTC, Ramesh Saxena -- then IRCTC Director and Sujata Hotels Pvt Ltd.
The CBI on July 5, 2017 filed a corruption case against Rabri Devi, Lalu Prasad and Tejashwi Yadav for alleged irregularities in the allotment of contracts of two IRCTC hotels in Ranchi and Puri in 2006 to a private firm.
The contracts were given to Sujata Hotels, a company owned by Vijay and Vinay Kochhar, in lieu of a bribe in the form of a three-acre commercial plot at a prime location in Patna district.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Judge issues temporary injunction against Trump administration cancellation of humanities grants
Washington (AP): A district court judge in New York issued a preliminary injunction Friday night stopping the mass cancellation of National Endowment for the Humanities grants to members of the Authors Guild on the grounds that their First Amendment rights were violated.
Judge Colleen McMahon of the US District Court in the Southern District of New York stayed the mass cancellations of grants previously awarded to guild members and ordered that any funds associated with the grants not be reobligated until a trial on the merits of the case is held.
In reaching her decision, the judge said the “defendants terminated the grants based on the recipients' perceived viewpoint, in an effort to drive such views out of the marketplace of ideas. This is most evident by the citation in the Termination Notices to executive orders purporting to combat Radical Indoctrination' and Radical … DEI Programs,' and to further Biological Truth.'”
One of the grants was to a professor writing a book on the reemergence of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s and 1980s. On a spreadsheet entitled “Copy of NEH Active Grants,” the government flagged the work as being connected to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, McMahon wrote.
The judge said several other history projects on the spreadsheet were also canceled in part because of their connection to DEI-related subjects.
“Far be it from this Court to deny the right of the Administration to focus NEH priorities on American history and exceptionalism as the year of our semiquincentennial approaches,” McMahon said. “Such refocusing is ordinarily a matter of agency discretion. But agency discretion does not include discretion to violate the First Amendment. Nor does not give the Government the right to edit history.“
McMahon said some of the grantees lost grants simply because they had received them during the Biden administration.
The Guild filed a class action lawsuit in May against the NEH and the Department of Government Efficiency for terminating grants that had already been appropriated by Congress.
The humanities groups' lawsuit said DOGE brought the core work of the humanities councils “to a screeching halt” this spring when it terminated its grant program.
The lawsuit was among several filed by humanities groups and historical, research and library associations to try to stop funding cuts and the dissolution of federal agencies and organizations.
McMahon noted her injunction is narrowly tailored “to maintain the status quo until we can decide whether Plaintiffs are entitled to ultimate relief. It does nothing more.”
The judge denied a temporary injunction request from the American Council of Learned Societies, as well as several of their claims in the lawsuit. Their case included the American Historical Association and the Modern Language Association.
