Bengal announces compensation for bridge collapse victim's kin
Darjeeling, Sep 4 : The West Bengal government will pay compensation of Rs 5 lakh to the family of the deceased in Majerhat bridge collapse in Kolkata on Tuesday, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said here.
The government will also pay Rs 50,000 to each of the injured, Banerjee told reporters.
"We will pay Rs 5 lakh to the family of the dead person as compensation. We will also give Rs 50 thousand to each of the injured," the Chief Minister said.
One person died and 19 people were injured when a portion of the Majerhat bridge collapsed in South Kolkata on Tuesday afternoon.
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.
BJP responsible for Sabarimala women entry verdict, LDF's stand same as 2007 affidavit: Min Vasavan
Kottayam (Kerala) (PTI): Kerala Devaswom Minister V N Vasavan on Saturday blamed the BJP for the 2018 Supreme Court verdict permitting women's entry into Sabarimala and said the LDF government's current stand remains the same as the affidavit filed before the apex court in 2007.
He was responding to reporters' queries regarding the affidavit to be filed by the state government before the nine-member bench of the Supreme Court clarifying its position on the entry of women of menstruating age into the hill shrine.
He said the 2018 verdict came after women lawyers associated with the BJP approached the Supreme Court.
"We had filed an affidavit in 2007 stating that the issue should be decided by experts in ritualistic matters. We are still maintaining that stand," he said.
The Supreme Court has not sought the state government's position on women's entry now, but has asked for clarification on certain constitutional issues, he added.
"We have assigned the Advocate General and constitutional experts in the Supreme Court to give the reply. They will respond accordingly," the minister said.
He added that if the court seeks the state government's stand on the matter, it would be presented, noting that the LDF government had already stated its position in the affidavit filed in 2007.
"The party's (CPI-M) stand is the same as the government's. The government is with the devotees. We have always been with the devotees," he said.
The minister also criticised the opposition, alleging that they repeatedly approach courts on various issues and return with adverse responses.
"They go to court on several matters and come back with adverse responses. Has there been an opposition in Kerala that has faced so many setbacks from courts," he asked.
When asked about the state government’s actions in 2018 following the Supreme Court verdict allowing women of all ages to enter Sabarimala, he said no such interpretation should be made as the government had already clarified its stand in the 2007 affidavit.
"If the Supreme Court gives any verdict, can we say anything against it. The women’s entry was the decision of the apex court of the country," he said.
He said the 2018 verdict came after women lawyers associated with the BJP approached the SC.
"They are now hiding. Actually they were standing for it. But here they are taking a different stand," he said.
He further alleged that attempts to facilitate women's entry in 2018 were made by BJP activists.
"It was BJP's young lawyers who filed the case and received the verdict. They then called it a historic judgement. But after some stage, they changed their position," he claimed.
He said the LDF government's position was that it respects the Supreme Court's verdict.
"But in our affidavit filed in 2007 we clearly stated that the entry of women of menstruating age should be decided by experts in ritualistic matters," he said.
He denied allegations that the state government had taken special interest in facilitating the entry of women of menstruating age into Sabarimala in 2018.
The Supreme Court in 2018 permitted women of menstruating age to enter the Sabarimala temple, following which Kerala witnessed widespread protests.
Currently, the Supreme Court is considering appeals against the earlier verdict.
