Jharkhand assembly passes bill to raise reservations to 77%
Ranchi (PTI): A bill was passed in the Jharkhand assembly on Friday to raise the total reservation offered to different categories to 77 per cent.
In a special session, the assembly passed an amendment to the Jharkhand Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services Act, 2001, raising the reservations for STs, SCs, EBCs, OBCs and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in government jobs from the present 60 per cent.
The bill proposes that the state will urge the Centre for changes in the Ninth Schedule of Constitution.
In the proposed reservation, local people of the SC community will get a quota of 12 per cent, STs will get 28 per cent, Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) 15 per cent, OBCs 12 per cent, and EWS barring those from the other reserved categories 10 per cent.
At present, the STs get a 26 per cent reservation in Jharkhand, while SCs get 10 per cent quota.
The OBCs currently get a 14 per cent quota in the state, and increasing it was an electoral promise of all mainstream parties in 2019, including the ruling alliance of JMM, Congress and RJD.
The bill was passed amid protests by MLAs of the ruling BJP.
Chief Minister Hemant Soren termed the legislation a "suraksha kavach" (safety shield) for the state's people who foiled conspiracies by the opposition.
Proposals for some amendments, and a proposal to send the bill for vetting by an assembly committee were rejected.
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.
