In­dia sum­mons Pak's Dy HC

Millennium Post - - NATION - OUR COR­RE­SPON­DENT

NEW DELHI: In­dia sum­moned Pak­istan's Deputy High Com­mis­sioner on Mon­day here and lodged a strong protest over at­tempts be­ing made to raise the Khal­is­tan is­sue dur­ing the visit of Sikh pil­grims to that coun­try.

In a state­ment, the Min­istry of Ex­ter­nal Af­fairs said Pak­istan was called upon to im­me­di­ately stop all such ac­tiv­i­ties that were aimed at un­der­min­ing In­dia's sovereignty, ter­ri­to­rial in­tegrity and in­cite­ment of dishar­mony in In­dia.

"A strong protest was lodged at at­tempts be­ing made dur­ing the on­go­ing visit of the Sikh pil­grims from In­dia to Pak­istan to raise the is­sue of 'Khal­is­tan' by mak­ing in­flam­ma­tory state­ments and dis­play­ing posters at var­i­ous places of pil­grims visit in Pak­istan," the min­istry said. It was con­veyed that such re­peated at­tempts by au­thor­i­ties and en­ti­ties in Pak­istan to ex­tend sup­port to se­ces­sion­ist move­ments in In­dia amount to in­ter­fer­ence in its in­ter­nal af­fairs, the MEA said.

It also said such in­ci­dents dur­ing the visit of In­dian pil­grims went against the spirit

of the bi­lat­eral pro­to­col of 1974 gov­ern­ing the ex­change of vis­its of pil­grims be­tween the two coun­tries.

The sum­mon­ing of Pak­istan's Deputy High Com­mis­sioner came a day af­ter In­dia lodged a strong protest with Pak­istan over block­ing

of ac­cess of vis­it­ing Sikh pil­grims to In­dian diplo­mats in that coun­try and even "com­pelling" the In­dian en­voy to re­turn while on way to a promi­nent gu­rud­wara there. The MEA had on Sun­day said a group of around 1,800 Sikh pil­grims are on a visit to Pak­istan. BENGLURUR: Amid protests over the dis­tri­bu­tion of tickets af­ter the Congress party an­nounced its first list, the re­volt within the party seems to be grow­ing as a se­nior leader called the Chief Min­is­ter Sid­dara­ma­iah an out­sider, say­ing that the state lead­er­ship lacks the abil­ity to take ev­ery­one along.

The Congress on Sun­day night re­leased its first list of 218 can­di­dates for the May 12 elec­tions, field­ing Chief Min­is­ter Sid­dara­ma­iah from Chamundesh­wari and state party chief G Paramesh­wara from Ko­rate­gere. When asked if peo­ple who came from JDS were given im­por­tance in ticket dis­tri­bu­tion, Congress leader KR Khan said, "It is a re­al­ity of our party. Our CM, along with oth­ers, came from JDS and so he gives more im­por­tance to them." Khan also said that Sid­dara­ma­iah seems to have no at­tach­ment to lead­ers and party cadres. Stat­ing that it is sad that state lead­er­ship lacks the abil­ity to take ev­ery­one along, he said, "New peo­ple have been given re­spon­si­bil­i­ties, who don't even know how to treat se­niors. If a high com­mand doesn't take care of this as­pect of state lead­er­ship it might bring losses for the party."

Sup­port­ers of sev­eral other lead­ers have be­come an­gry over the dis­tri­bu­tion of tickets. The dis­si­dent Congress work­ers in Kar­nataka's Mandya, Chik­maglur, Ben­galuru and Bel­lary took out a rally and van­dalised party's of­fices for deny­ing ticket to Raviku­mar and giv­ing it to sit­ting MLA, ac­tor Am­bar­ish from Mandya.

Raviku­mar's sup­port­ers also at­tacked party of­fice and smashed the chairs and doors., de­mand­ing a ticket for him from Mandya. Sup­port­ers of An­jana Murthy also protested af­ter he was de­nied a ticket from Ne­la­man­gala con­stituency. R Narayanaswamy is the can­di­date from Ne­la­man­gala.

Kar­nataka is wit­ness­ing a three-cor­ner con­test among the Congress, BJP and the HD Deve Gowda-led JD (S). The re­sult of the elec­tion will be out on May 15. In ticket dis­tri­bu­tion, the party has not ap­plied the "one-fam­ily, one-ticket" for­mula for the state polls as it granted tickets to the chief min­is­ter and his son, the Home Min­is­ter and his daugh­ter, and the Law min­is­ter and his son.

The first list in­cludes at least 15 women can­di­dates and the names of the seven for­mer JD-S and two EX-BJP leg­is­la­tors who joined the party ear­lier this year. Home Min­is­ter Ra­ma­linga Reddy will con­test the polls from BTM Lay­out and his daugh­ter Soumya R from the Jayana­gara Assem­bly con­stituency (Ben­galuru). NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Mon­day di­rected realty firm Jaiprakash As­so­ciates Lim­ited (JAL) to de­posit Rs 100 crore with its Registry by May 10.

The bench headed by Chief Jus­tice Di­pak Misra also di­rected the In­sol­vency Res­o­lu­tion Pro­fes­sional (IRP) to con­sider the rep­re­sen­ta­tion of JAL on re­vival plans as per law.

Mean­while, the coun­sel for the firm told the apex court that it had al­ready de­posited Rs 100 crore on April 12 in pur­suance of an ear­lier or­der. The firm also sought to con­sider its NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court to­day set aside a Na­tional Green Tri­bunal or­der that had cre­ated a con­tro­versy by putting re­stric­tions on devo­tees ask­ing them to main­tain si­lence while stand­ing in front of the 'Maha Shivalinga', a nat­u­ral for­ma­tion in­side the Amar­nath cave in South Kash­mir Hi­malayas.

The top court said that the De­cem­ber 14 last year's or­der should not have been passed by the NGT on a pe­ti­tion which did not con­cern the Amar­nath cave shrine. Ob­serv­ing that re­vival pro­posal, say­ing it has been com­plet­ing 500 houses per month. The top court had on March 21 asked the JAL to de­posit Rs 200 crore with its registry in two in­stal­ments for pay­ing back home buy­ers, who have opted for re­fund in­stead of get­ting pos­ses­sion of flats. The real estate ma­jor had said it had de­posited Rs 550 crore so far with the apex court registry and sought in­dul­gence on the ground that only eight per cent of the over 30,000 home-buy­ers had opted for re­fund and rest 92 per cent wanted de­liv­ery of flats. due pro­ce­dure needed to be fol­lowed, a bench of Jus­tices M B Lokur and Deepak Gupta asked pe­ti­tioner Gauri Mulekhi to file an ap­pro­pri­ate pe­ti­tion with re­gard to the pol­lu­tion at the Amar­nath cave. The 'shivalinga' is a sta­lag­mite formed by freez­ing of wa­ter drops fall­ing from the roof of the cave and grow­ing up ver­ti­cally from the cave floor. Dur­ing the hear­ing, se­nior ad­vo­cate Mukul Ro­hatgi, ap­pear­ing for the Amar­nath Shrine Board, said the tri­bunal had "jumped the gun".

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.