Opposition MPs submit notices in both Houses seeking motion for removal of CEC Kumar
New Delhi (PTI): Opposition MPs have submitted notices in both Houses of Parliament seeking a motion for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, sources said on Friday.
As many as 130 Lok Sabha MPs and 63 Rajya Sabha MPs have signed the notice, a source said.
The signatories include members from all the INDIA bloc parties, the source said, including the Aam Aadmi Party, which has also backed the move despite no longer being formally part of the opposition alliance, the source said.
Some independent MPs have also signed the notice, and several others have expressed interest in joining the initiative, the source added.
This is the first time a notice has been moved seeking the removal of the CEC. According to sources, the notice lists seven charges against Kumar, including alleged "partisan and discriminatory conduct in office", "deliberate obstruction of investigation of electoral fraud" and "mass disenfranchisement."
The opposition parties have accused the CEC of aiding the ruling BJP on several occasions, especially with the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, which they alleged aims to help the saffron party at the Centre.
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.
Environment ministry endorses names of 10-member expert committee set up to define Aravalli hills
New Delhi (PTI): The Union Environment Ministry has told the Supreme Court that it has no objection with the Central Empowered Committee's proposed 10-member high-powered expert committee which has been tasked to come up with a uniform definition for the Aravalli hills and ranges.
In an affidavit filed before the top court, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has endorsed the names suggested for the high-powered expert committee comprising in-service and retired bureaucrats associated with the Forest Survey of India (FSI), Geological Survey of India (GSI) and Survey of India, along with academicians.
"The MoEFCC respectfully submits that it has no objection if this court as the aforesaid suggested names for the constitution of the proposed High Powered Committee. It is further submitted that the Ministry does not have any additional names to propose at this stage for inclusion in the said committee," the affidavit said.
The committee is proposed to be headed by Kanchan Devi, the current director general of the Indian Council of Forestry Research & Education.
The MoEF, in its affidavit, said the aspects relating to the Aravalli Hills and Ranges require a comprehensive and analytical examination, including stakeholder consultation, by a group of domain experts in the relevant fields.
The CEC in its report to the apex court said Devi, a 1991 Indian Forest Service officer from the Madhya Pradesh cadre, has over three decades of experience in forestry education and research, wildlife and forest policy, and institutional leadership.
The other members include Subhash Ashutosh, former director general of FSI,
former GSI director Rajendra Kumar Sharma, climate and energy policy expert Tejal Kanitkar, senior academician and life sciences researcher Jaya Parkash Yadav, senior geographer and scholar Tejbir Singh Rana, former additional surveyor general of India SV Singh, former Gujarat principal chief conservator of forests CN Pandey, and former Nagaland PCCF Dharmendra Prakash.
The CEC also recommended names of RN Mishra, a noted author and Vijay Dhasmana, an ecological restoration practitioner and conservationist.
On February 26, the top court had asked the environment ministry and other stakeholders to suggest names of domain experts for the panel which would define the Aravalli hills and ranges, and observed that only lawful mining would be allowed in the region.
The top court, on December 29, took note of the outcry over the new definition of the Aravallis and kept in abeyance its November 20 directions that accepted a uniform definition of these hills and ranges. It had also stalled all mining activities.
It remarked that there was a need to resolve "critical ambiguities", including whether the criteria of 100-metre elevation and the 500-metre gap between hills would strip a significant portion of the range of environmental protection.
