Stalin lashes out at Centre, calls union budget a 'revenge' against country
Chennai (PTI): Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin on Saturday launched a sharp attack against the ruling BJP at the Centre over the 2024-25 Union Budget, calling it a 'revenge' taken by the saffron party against the country and warned it will face more electoral defeats since it was committing "mistake after mistake."
Explaining his decision to boycott the Niti Aayog meeting scheduled in New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday, Stalin said he was 'compelled' to speak in the people's forum, seeking justice due to the "discriminatory attitude" towards Tamil Nadu reflected in the budget.
The state's pleas for disaster relief to the tune of Rs 37,000 crore and Chennai Metro Rail's second phase were not heeded to, he said in a statement.
Further, the BJP runs "the government with political motive".
"The budget presented on July 23 is evidence of this. In the recently held parliamentary elections, the people of various states defeated the anti-people BJP. The Budget presented by Union Finance Minister (Nirmala Sitharaman) seems like a vengeful act against the States and people who boycotted the BJP. Instead of preparing a budget for the welfare of all Indians, she has prepared a budget to take revenge against those who voted for the INDIA bloc," he alleged.
The Union BJP government was disregarding Tamil Nadu continuously.
The Centre has held up funds that should have been released as usual for the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, he said and alleged the former is 'adamant' that it will release funds only after agreeing to implement the NEP.
On the announcement that the stamp duty levied by the states will be reduced, he said it was done so without consulting the states. The GST system has already taken away the right of taxation powers away from the states.
"When they have not even disbursed the GST compensation of Rs 20,000 crore to Tamil Nadu, who gave them the authority to alter the tax levying system of the states. The middle-class is suffering without any concession in income tax for the last 10 years. The Union Government is patting their own back for announcing a meagre tax benefit of up to Rs 17,500 per year to individual taxpayers under the NTR (New Tax Regime) when majority can't avail that too," the CM said.
"This is not just a budget taking revenge on Tamil Nadu—it is a budget that takes revenge against entire India! This is a 'save the government budget' of BJP to remain in power. As the voice of the people of Tamil Nadu, in fact, as the voice of all the Indian people, let me say something--You (BJP) are committing mistake after mistake. You will suffer more and more defeats. Just as both houses of the Indian Parliament are in outrage, the hearts of Indian people are also raging against you. The BJP must answer," Stalin, president of the ruling DMK, said.
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.
Message of 'live and let live': Sibal hails SC ruling on Section 6A of Citizenship Act
New Delhi (PTI): Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal on Friday hailed the Supreme Court upholding the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, saying it is a message to all that "live and let live" and conserve the culture of a multicultural and plural nation that India is.
In a significant judgement, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act which grants Indian citizenship to immigrants from Bangladesh who entered Assam before March 25, 1971.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud and Justices Surya Kant, M M Sundresh, and Manoj Misra further underscored the necessity for more robust policy measures to curb illegal immigration.
In a post on X, Sibal said, "Citizenship Act, 1955, Section 6-A, upheld by Supreme Court. Message to all: 'Live and let live'. Conserve the culture of a 'multicultural and plural nation that India is'.
"Bhakts listening? Bajrang Dal listening? Governments listening? Hope so!" Sibal said.
Section 6A was inserted in 1985 into the Citizenship Act of 1955 following the signing of the Assam accord between the then Rajiv Gandhi government at the Centre and the agitating groups led by Prafulla Mahanta, including All Assam Students Union in the state.
The verdict is believed to give a boost to those opposed to grant of Indian citizenship to immigrants who entered Assam after March 25, 1971.
According to the provision, all those who came to Assam on or after January 1, 1966, but before March 25, 1971, from Bangladesh at the time of commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985, and since then are residents of Assam, can register for Indian citizenship.
As a result, the provision fixes March 25, 1971, as the cut-off date for granting citizenship to migrants, particularly those from Bangladesh, residing in Assam.
While the CJI, Justices Kant, Sundresh, and Misra upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A, Justice J B Pardiwala dissented in a minority verdict.
Holding the cut-off date of March 25, 1971 as rational, the CJI, writing for himself, said Section 6A was included with the objective of reducing the influx of migrants to India and dealing with those who had already migrated.
CJI Chandrachud said Section 6A was not violative of Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution, which stipulates a cut-off date for conferring citizenship to migrants from east and west Pakistan at the commencement of the Constitution".
"The Assam Accord was a political solution to the issue of growing migration and Section 6A was a legislative solution. Section 6A must not be read detached from the previous legislation enacted by Parliament to deal with the problem of influx of migrants of Indian origin... Section 6A is one more statutory intervention in the long list of legislation that balances the humanitarian needs of migrants of Indian origin and the impact of such migration on economic and cultural needs of Indian states," he wrote.
Justice Surya Kant, writing for himself and Justices Sundresh and Misra, said, Section 6A falls within the bounds of the Constitution and does not contravene the foundational principles of fraternity.
