BJP wins...

“We are committed to the cause of development and creation of jobs in the state,” he said.

With these victories, the BJP now has control of 14 out of 25 civic bodies that have gone to the polls since 2015, and has captured a majority of the state’s urban political landscape as well. Only two more civic corporations, Ahmednagar and Dhule, are left to go to the polls, which are scheduled for December this year.

The Sangli defeat is a setback for state Nationalist Congress Party chief Jayant Patil, and state Congress’ youth wing president and legislator Vishwajit Kadam. Congress had 41 seats and the NCP, 19 corporators, in the outgoing body, while the BJP had officially no corporator in its kitty. Three of its party members had won civic seats as a part of a front floated by a local leader.

Kadam said he was shock at the loss, and alleged the BJP had resorted to illegal means to win the election. The victory in Sangli-miraj for the BJP is also surprising, as the Maratha community is dominant here.

In Jalgaon, Jain was decimated even after controlling the civic body for more than three decades. Jain, a Shiv Sena leader and an accused in the Jalgaon housing scam, had been winning power through a local front he floated, the Khandesh Vikas Aghadi. This time, he decided to fight the election under the Sena’s party symbol.

Former mayor Lalit Kolhe, who was with the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, joined the BJP just a few days ahead of the elections, with 11 other corporators of his party. This helped BJP strengthen its position. The win in Jalgaon came despite an internal strife in the party between two senior leaders, former revenue minister Eknath Khadse and water resources minister Girish Mahajan.

Mahajan has been credited with this victory, although Khadse’s aides insisted their leader had rooted for going solo.

“The voters stood by us, believing in our promise of development. We will stick to our promise and development in Jalgaon will be visible in the next one year,” Mahajan said.

Gopichand Padalkar, who has been leading the reservation protest for the Dhangar community, said neither the Marathas nor Dhangars made their demand an election issue as the reservation has little importance in local elections. “If the decision about reservation is not taken well within time, the ruling parties will pay a heavy price in the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections,” he said. sion’s, notification, only people with a master’s degree are eligible to pursue PHD.

According to a senior HRD official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the issue raised by the IIMS was examined in light of the PHD programmes conducted by some IITS, which are also institutes of national Importance and are empowered to award degrees. IIMS too have been allowed to award degrees under the IIM Act, 2017.

However, the ministry has also pointed out that Iit-delhi, for instance, has prescribed a minimum period of three years for PHD for scholars having a degree other than a Masters or equivalent.

“For students with a four-year graduation, the minimum duration would be three years. The duration for completing PHD for those having a Masters degree is two years so similar rules have to be followed by IIMS,” said a second HRD ministry official.

The ministry has proposed that in case the minimum entry qualification is a Masters degree or professional qualification of CA/ICWA/CS or post graduate diploma of two years’ duration, the minimum course duration would be two years or four semesters. In case of a four-year or more Bachelors degree, the minimum duration would be three years or six semesters.

The Indian Institutes of Management Bill, 2017, which was passed on December 20, 2017 and came into effect from January 31, 2018, empowers IIMS “to grant degrees, diplomas and other academic distinctions or titles and to institute and award fellowships, scholarships, prizes and medals, honorary awards and other distinctions”.

“There is a certain rigor that is required in PHD prgrammes and hence fundamentally it is not a great idea, but having said, that it also depends on the four-year programmes that students undertake before they enroll for a PHD programme. For instance, if that programme has taken into account initiating the students into research then it does make sense,” said SS Mantha, an academician and former chairman of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE).

The bench wondered why centre and states had so far failed to collect “quantifiable data” to justify reservations in promotions despite the 2006 ruling. The Centre wants the top court to reconsider the judgment, terming it non-implementable.

CJI Misra quizzed Venugopal as to how a community’s backwardness could be determined without quantifiable data.

“Because it’s a dynamic process. People die, retire or are transferred and data keeps fluctuating”, replied the AG. He said it was a “practically impossible” task to furnish this data. The top law officer asked the judges to keep in mind that SC and STS had been socially disadvantaged for over a thousand years.

Justice Joseph asked if there was a roster only at the entry level or for promotions too, to which Venugopal replied that there was one now for promotions. “Since roster is there, it satisfies a quantifiable data. In each case we don’t need to get additional data”, he said. The 2006 judgement, he said, added backwardness as a condition, which goes against the “very grain of reservation.”

Advocating the need for 22.5% reservation in government jobs for SC and STS, AG said it must apply for the communities even in promotions. According to him, the 2006 verdict was unclear as to what it meant by quantifiable data and how it should be determined.

“What is the inadequacy? How is it to be determined? Your lordship has to decide,” Venugopal said.

Opposing this, senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan said backwardness was the pre-requisite for Article16(4) — the enabling provision for the state to make reservations for any backward classes which are inadequately represented in services.

“This prerequisite does not go away”, he said adding the backwardness of any class has to be proved.” Dhavan dismissed the argument that the 2006 judgement needs a reconsideration. reacting to media reports quoting Antiguan authorities saying Indian agencies provided no adverse information on Choksi when the Caribbean country conducted a background check on him. MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar clarified that when the NOC (no-objection certificate) was issued, there was no police case against Choksi.