Congress heads for landslide victory in Zila Parishad polls
Chandigarh, Sep 22 : The ruling Congress in Punjab on Saturday won the most seats in the Zila Parishad and Panchayat Samiti elections and headed for a landslide victory as counting was underway. The main opposition AAP in the state assembly faced a humiliating defeat.
Out of 113 Zila Parishad seats -- out of a total of 354 -- for which results have been declared, the Congress won 106, the BJP-Akali combine six and independents won one. The Aam Adami Party had not won a single seat.
Among prominent winners were former Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee President Bibi Jagjir Kaur's daughter Ranjit Kaur; Housing Minister Tript Rajinder Singh Bajwa's son Ravi Nandan Singh Bajwa; Congress legislator Ramanjit Sikki's son-in-law Maninderjit Singh Mani; and former Congress legislator Kawaljit Singh Lally's son Mehtab Singh.
In Patiala, the home constituency of Chief Minister Amarinder Singh, the Congress has won 43 Panchayat Samiti seats and the Shiromani Akali Dal four.
The Akalis suffered a humiliating defeat in their home turf Muktsar as the Congress won 10 of the 13 Zila Parishad zones.
All six Zila Parishad seats in Ludhiana were won by the Congress.
The Congress won a majority in Gurdaspur by securing 154 of the total 213 Panchayat Samiti zones. In Zila Parishad, the Congress won 15 of the 25 seats and was leading in the remaining seats.
Out of the total 148 seats of the Panchayat Samiti in Bathinda, the Congress won 31, Akalis four and the AAP and independents three each. The counting for 107 seats is on.
Sporadic skirmishes, mainly between the Congress and the Akalis, were witnessed during the Zila Parishad and Panchayat Samiti polls on September 19.
The voting percentage was 58 per cent.
A total of 354 Zila Parishad and 2,900 Panchayat Samiti members will be elected. There are 22 Zila Parishads and 150 Panchayat Samitis in the state.
Chief Minister Amarinder Singh congratulated his party on their victory saying people had endorsed the positive development and rejected the Akalis' "malicious campaign".
Pointing out that this was the fourth consecutive humiliating defeat of the SAD-BJP combine, after back-to-back victories for the Congress in the state assembly, Urban Local Bodies, Gurdaspur parliamentary and Shahkot assembly by-polls, he termed it a vindication of his party's efforts to bring the state out of the quagmire of devastation into which it had been plunged by the previous SAD-BJP government.
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.
MUDA case: Court reserves verdict in ED's petition challenging Lokayukta 'B' report
Bengaluru: The Special Court for People's Representatives, which heard the petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenging the Lokayukta 'B' Report that stated Chief Minister Siddaramaiah had no role in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) illegal land allotment case, has reserved its verdict.
During the hearing, the Lokayukta's lawyer said that the petition filed by the ED is not allowed under the law. There is no clarity about the investigation in the ED's petition. The ED had given a letter and 27 documents to the Lokayukta police. Based on these documents, the Lokayukta Investigating Officer filed the 'B' Report.
The ED's letter was also leaked to the media. This letter and the documents are included on page 646 of the charge sheet. The Lokayukta Investigating Officer's opinion has also been recorded. The ED is not an aggrieved party and does not have the right to question the 'B' Report. The ED is not allowed to file such an interim application, lawyer Venkatesh Arabatdi argued, citing a Supreme Court verdict.
“The Lokayukta Investigating Officer examined all the documents collected by the police and others and gave their opinion. If the ED, a third party, is allowed to intervene, it will create complications,” lawyer Venkatesh Arabatdi urged, requesting that the ED's application not be considered.
Later, ED lawyer Madhukar Deshpande argued that the ED is a statutory informant under Section 66(2) of the PMLA Act. The ED’s powers were clarified in the Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary case. Judgments in the Martin and Nagaraj cases in 2022 also upheld the ED's powers. The Supreme Court ruled that ED and local police investigations should be complementary. In such cases, the aggrieved person does not need to be directly affected. The ED can also file a complaint against the 'B' Report, he argued.
following which, the lawyer for the complainant, Snehamayi Krishna, argued that if any person provides information, they should be considered a witness.
But while the Lokayukta police gave one version, the ED gave another. The Lokayukta said the police had not considered the ED's report.
The court, after hearing all arguments, reserved its order for April 15.
