Spending
Don't use Facebook, Twitter e-mail ID for online money transactions

Users should have separate e-mail ID for social networking site and for carrying out...

Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access

Subscribe

Already A Subscriber?
Login
Yearly Digital+Print Access

Subscribe

Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MSSN member?
Login

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation
Everybody except Congress slams diesel price hike, LPG policy

The price hike has come as a cruel joke and 'mortal blow' to the common man and farmers already reeling under inflation and drought like situation

New Delhi: Slamming the government over diesel price hike, UP allies Trinamool Congress and Samajwadi Party have demanded an immediate rollback while the opposition said the increase will further hit the common man and create "mayhem" in the economy, reports PTI.

 

"We are unhappy. We will not accept it and demand its rollback," Mamata Banerjee, chief of Trinamool Congress, the second-largest constituent of the UPA said in Kolkata.

 

"If people do not mind, I will be most happy to withdraw support (to the UPA). If I withdraw support then other parties will provide support to them. And, then ask why we left the UPA which led to its collapse. People had misunderstood us when we had withdrawn support earlier."

 

The Trinamool Congress would take to the streets for 72 hours from Friday opposing the decisions, she said.

 

Demanding an immediate rollback in diesel prices, the Samajwadi Party, which provides outside support to the UPA, said, the decision is ill-timed.

 

"We demand immediate withdrawal of the hike as it will badly hit the common man and farmers," SP leader Kamal Farooqi said.

 

Their sharp reaction came after the government decided to hike diesel prices by Rs5.62 per litre effective Thursday tonight.

 

The Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs, headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, had decided to raise diesel prices.

 

It also decided to restrict supply of subsidised cooking gas to six cylinders per household in a year.

 

The BJP termed the price hike as a cruel joke and "mortal blow" to the common man and farmers and charged the government with conspiring with petrol 'mafia'.

 

"This is a cruel joke on the common man in the country. It has hit farmers hard during the peak paddy sowing season. We will not allow this hike. We will not allow this government to loot the common man like this," BJP Vice President Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said.

 

BJP leader Yashwant Sinha said, "Diesel increase will have a cascading effect on the economy as a whole. Prices are already not under control, so this is going to contribute to overall inflation and create mayhem in the economy."

 

CPI National Secretary D Raja termed the decisions as "retrogade and anti-people".

 

"It will have an adverse effect on the prices of essential commodities which are already high. It will further increase hardship of common people. Government should not go ahead," he said.

 

AIADMK supremo Jayalalithaa accused the Government of constantly betraying the people. She said the diesel hike would result in increase of prices of essential commodities and vegetable.

 

"I demand the rollback of the hike in diesel price and ceiling in cylinder subsidy," she said.

 

"Even a family of 4 persons need the use of at least one cylinder per month. Hence they will also have to ease out the 6 cylinder norms, which is absolutely unreasonable. It goes without saying that the scam money is not with the exchequer but with others like the nexus of politicians-bureaucrats - businessmen who have pocketed the loot. Therefore it appears that the Government is left with no options but to raise the prices of diesel and do away with subsidies to augment the Government resources. They are least bothered if the common man suffers or survives on account of this price onslaught," said Dolphy Dsouza, former National Vice-President of All India Catholic Union and immediate Past President of The Bombay Catholic Sabha.

 

Admitting that it was an "unpleasant" decision of the government, Congress said it was not in favour of a hike to such an extent because it hurts the farmers and the common man.

 

Government has to take a conscious decision after taking all allies of the UPA into confidence, party general secretary Digvijay Singh said, adding that the issue should be discussed in the UPA coordination committee.

User

COMMENTS

M G WARRIER

4 years ago

This is a move which affects aam aadmi already struggling to make both ends meet. What is intriguing is the recent attempts by government to compartmentalize or divide consumers to avoid direct confrontation with a class of consumers. Such an effort is evident in charging double the cost of sixth cylinder for the 7th one, differential charges for electricity for use during normal hours of consumption in Kerala, dividing employees into two categories for pension benefits (in this case without any legislative sanction) and so on. The absence of transparency in governance is going to cost the nation heavily. Credibility once lost will be difficult to restore.

REPLY

PPM

In Reply to M G WARRIER 4 years ago

UPA is not worried about the aam aadmi as they are keen to sell india in parts to foreign countries. Prime Minister is smiling today, that means, what he has done today (allowing FDI in retail ans airlines)is approved by his masters.Also, increase in diesel price and restriction in gas cylinder will divert the attention from COALGATE to Diesel /LPG.

Shadi Katyal

4 years ago

The very fact that GOI has been involved in such large subsidies that now it must start to wean the public. Diesel for farmers is a joke as it is the biggest land holder who take advantage and not a poor farmer.Even car owners enjoy this subsidy.Has it been left in provate sector from day one,we will not be seeing this turmoil.We must educate our political parties about the cost of CRUDE OIL and its effect on our budget and economy and start to learn that populism may bring votes but it leaves a bad taste when prices are increased. We in India must learn to wean away from such subsidies. We must face the reality and truth of world prices and no party should exploit for votes and harm the nation

REPLY

M G WARRIER

In Reply to Shadi Katyal 4 years ago

Subsidy is not just restricted to oil prices. When land or natural resources are 'gifted' to private sector, there is an element of subsidy. Every year, huge subsidies are given to business houses thru tax concessions.There is a reverse subsidy, when workers are not paid real wages. That is where, we have to see things in the Indian context.Even the losses estimated by CAG should be seen as subsidy given by the exchequer(read tax-payer)

Shadi Katyal

In Reply to M G WARRIER 4 years ago

This is a typical socialist answer when we donot wish to facew the truth that no Govt in the world can continue to subsidise any product for a long time unless revenues also inrease.We have lived too long on such subsidies.
the Industry is provided where it generates Revenues and employment for the people. One can complain about wages but do we have any Minimum wage set up in any state.Indusries can pay levish wages but prices of products will be higher for all of us.
Was the M

M G WARRIER

In Reply to Shadi Katyal 4 years ago

Ok Do not worry about isms. Try and understand the impact of subsidies and 'reverse' subsidies on aam aadmi. There is a Minimum Wages Act with state-wise amendments reading which a person of average intelligence like me will not be able to make head or tail out of it. You can accuse my arguments to be 'socialist', but do we not have to take care of the basic needs of the majority? Saying one thing twice, does not make the listener wiser.

Shadi Katyal

In Reply to M G WARRIER 4 years ago

This is a typical socialist answer when we donot wish to facew the truth that no Govt in the world can continue to subsidise any product for a long time unless revenues also inrease.We have lived too long on such subsidies.
the Industry is provided where it generates Revenues and employment for the people. One can complain about wages but do we have any Minimum wage set up in any state.Indusries can pay levish wages but prices of products will be higher for all of us.
Was the M

M G WARRIER

4 years ago

This UPA and its allies are making a mockery of parliamentary democracy. Some of their allies are in the opposition also! Whatever way you throw you up, sufficient number to sustain the government will make a formation and frown at you. Saw leader of one of the coalition allies lamenting that 'I am willing to withdraw support to government on this issue, but some other party will come and rescue!' A sad day for Indian democracy.

Are we witnessing the death of a fundamental right under RTI?

According to former CIC Shailesh Gandhi citizens need to question the Supreme Court judgement and ask for a review by a larger bench, if they want RTI to remain relevant

The Supreme Court has given a judgement in Namit Sharma vs. Union of India on 13 September, 2012 in WP(C) 210 of 2012. The Court has given directions that all Information Commissions shall work in Benches of two members, and one member should be a ‘judicial member’. Thus 50% of the Commissioners will now be retired judges. "Effectively the disposal of pending cases will drop to about 50% of the current disposals. This will lead to Commissions deciding cases after five years or more in the next few years," says Shailesh Gandhi, former Central Information Commissioner under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

 

He said, "Citizens should question this judgement and ask for a review by a larger bench, if they want RTI to remain relevant. I believe there are adequate legal grounds to challenge this judgement."

 

On Thursday, the apex court, while lifting the stay on appointment of information commissioners under the RTI Act, said the government should give preference to people from judicial background while appointing such Commissioners.

 

RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal said the verdict by the Supreme Court on appointment of Information Commissioners is a classic example of judicial overreach. "If not reviewed, it would induce practical problems thus making the Act, which was drafted by civil society members with an aim for simplicity and practicability while maintaining transparency and accountability, a toothless law."

 

The bench of justices AK Patnaik and Swatanter Kumar passed the order on a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging Section 12 and 15 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, enumerating the qualifications needed for the appointment of members to the commissions.

 

The bench, however, refused to quash the Sections but asked the government to modify it so that people from the judicial background are also preferred for the post.

 

“..without any peradventure and veritably, we state that appointments of legally qualified, judicially trained and experienced persons would certainly manifest in more effective serving of the ends of justice as well as ensuring better administration of  justice by the Commission. It would render the adjudicatory process which involves critical legal questions and nuances of law, more adherent to justice and shall enhance the public confidence in the working of the Commission,” the apex court said in its judgement.

 

Currently, none of the eight members of the Central Information Commission (CIC), including the Chief Information Commissioner are from judicial background.

 

The CIC comprises one Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Information Commissioners. Presently, three posts of Information Commissioners are vacant in the CIC.

 

"At present Central Information Commission has eight Information Commissioners out of total sanctioned strength of eleven, with none of them having judicial background. To constitute double-bench with compulsion to have a member with judicial background, there is a need to appoint eight more members, which I don't think is possible with the current setup at the Commission," Mr Agrawal pointed out.

 

Here is a copy of the Supreme Court judgement...

 

User

COMMENTS

Rajinder

4 years ago

What expertise is carried by judicial members. Why they should be appointed. They only have experience of delaying delivery of justice.
Consumer protection Act requires that a case should be decided in 60 or 90 days (I do not remember exactly. There is no discretion given to extend the dead line. But 99% cases are decided after 1 year.
Recently I filed 2 cases against insurance cos. Since in these cases there was no dispute with the insurance cos on facts, I requested that case may be disposed off without any replication, evidence by way of evidence or written arguments (I included my written arguments in the complaint itself).
I also wrote in the complaint (first 3-4 paras) that in case my suggestions regarding replication etc are not acceptable then an appealable order may please be passed.
The result - no one read first 3-4 paras of the complaint.
When I referred to them I was told that my complaint will be dismissed.
I requested for dismissal of my complaint. At this point date was given for evidence by the OP. I reminded the judicial member that there is no dispute on the facts of the case and if there is dispute on facts I will drop my dispute.
I was told that I am misbehaving. I requested for an explanation about the part which is misbehaviour. I did not raise my voice at all. Is raising legal issues is misbehaiour.
After this point the next date was fixed for arguments.
That is the expertise carried by judicial members. And this is not a stray case. For last 8 years I have been facing this threat of dismissal of my case by different judicial members when I try to remind them that there is no dispute on facts of the case. They refer to some non existent court rules and given a lost expression.
The judges are not willing to learn.

Dipak Chatterjee

4 years ago

REGARDING SUPREME COURT DECISION ON RTI, CIC(CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONER) IS RIDICULOUS, OVERREACHING AND ENCROACHING THE JUDICIAL POWER, IT WILL DESTROY THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF COMMON CITIZEN, IT MUST BE APPEAL TO THE REVIEW BENCH OF SUPREME COURT.
DR. DIPAK CHATTERJEE

MOHAN

4 years ago

Supreme Court is right. Individuals with judicial back ground must be the Information commissioners.In Kerala none of the members have judicial back ground and many of their decisions are ludicrous.

REPLY

Rajinder

In Reply to MOHAN 4 years ago

What expertise is carried by judicial members. Why they should be appointed. They only have experience of delaying delivery of justice.
Consumer protection Act requires that a case should be decided in 60 or 90 days (I do not remember exactly. There is no discretion given to extend the dead line. But 99% cases are decided after 1 year.
Recently I filed 2 cases against insurance cos. Since in these cases there was no dispute with the insurance cos on facts, I requested that case may be disposed off without any replication, evidence by way of evidence or written arguments (I included my written arguments in the complaint itself).
I also wrote in the complaint (first 3-4 paras) that in case my suggestions regarding replication etc are not acceptable then an appealable order may please be passed.
The result - no one read first 3-4 paras of the complaint.
When I referred to them I was told that my complaint will be dismissed.
I requested for dismissal of my complaint. At this point date was given for evidence by the OP. I reminded the judicial member that there is no dispute on the facts of the case and if there is dispute on facts I will drop my dispute.
I was told that I am misbehaving. I requested for an explanation about the part which is misbehaviour. I did not raise my voice at all. Is raising legal issues is misbehaiour.
After this point the next date was fixed for arguments.
That is the expertise carried by judicial members. And this is not a stray case. For last 8 years I have been facing this threat of dismissal of my case by different judicial members when I try to remind them that there is no dispute on facts of the case. They refer to some non existent court rules and given a lost expression.
The judges are not willing to learn.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)