A consortium including Sunil Gavaskar, Nagarjuna and Vankina Chamundeswaranath has bought stake in IBL’s Mumbai Masters
Contrary to media report about Sachin Tendulkar buying stake in Mumbai franchise of the upcoming Indian Badminton League (IBL), it was another cricket legend from Mumbai, Sunil Gavaskar, who has bought stake.
A consortioum of former cricket captain Gavaskar, Telugu actor Nagarjuna and former manager of the Indian cricket team and businessman Vankina Chamundeswaranath bought stake in IBL’s Mumbai franchise, called as Mumbai Masters.
In a release, Gavaskar said, “I am proud to be associated with badminton which I’ve always admired and passionately followed and played a bit as a fan. The sport has produced legends and recorded many milestones for India and I hope my association with the Indian Badminton League proves to be a worthy contribution to the great sport of badminton."
The $1 million league is set to launch on 14th August with some high-voltage action expected between PVP’s Hyderabad Hotshots and BOP Group’s Banga Beats.
A total of 90 matches will be played in the IBL which will feature six franchises, Mumbai, Pune, Hyderabad, Delhi, Bangalore and Lucknow.
The IBL will be held in six cities from 14th to 31st August. The tournament will feature some of the top-50 players in the world and will be played under the Sudirman Cup format and televised LIVE to more than 100 countries.
The apex court said Medical Council is not empowered to prescribe all India medical entrance tests. However, the SC made it clear that its verdict will not affect admissions, which have already taken place
The Supreme Court on Thursday quashed the Medical Council of India’s (MCI) notification for holding common entrance tests for Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS), Bachelor of dental surgery (BDS) and post-graduate medical courses.
The majority, 2:1 verdict by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice Vikramajit Sen said that MCI is not empowered to prescribe all India medical entrance tests. Justice AR Dave said he did not share the view of Chief Justice Kabir and Justice Sen. A three-judge bench held that the MCI notification was ultra vires of the Constitution.
The apex court, however, made it clear that its verdict will not affect the admissions which have already taken place.
The court’s decision came on 115 petitions challenging the MCI notification on National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) for admission to MBBS and post-graduate medical courses conducted in colleges across the country.
Earlier in May this year, the apex court had lifted the bar on declaration of results of examinations that had already been conducted and said the admission process could go ahead.
About 11 officers representing various officers appeared before the CIC, but nobody had any clue whether those accused of violating the Bonded Labour Act were prosecuted or not. This is the 136th in a series of important judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi that can be used or quoted in an RTI application
The Central Information Commission (CIC), while allowing an appeal, directed the divisional commissioner of revenue department in Delhi to check and provide the information about the status of prosecution and violations of Bonded Labour System Act 1976 to the appellant.
While giving this judgement on 16 May 2011, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner said, “This appears to be a very serious matter and appears to indicate that though people are charged with having bonded labour, no prosecutions may be taking place. Alternately it means the prosecution is taking place by an agency, which none of the officers appears to be aware of.”
Delhi resident Priyanka Sinha, on 24 July 2010, sought information about statement of pending trial cases and decided cases under section 16 of the Bonded Labour System Act 1976 from the Public Information Officer (PIO) of Directorate of Prosecution at Tis Hazari Court. Here is the information she sought under the Right to Information (RTI) Act...
The PIO transferred the RTI application to the Labour department and from there on to various other departments.
After not receiving any reply from the PIO for over 50 days, Sinha filed her first appeal.
During the hearing before the First Appellate Authority (FAA), the PIO stated that the Directorate had not come across to any first information report (FIR) registered under the relevant provisions of 'the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976' exclusively. While disposing the appeal, the FAA said, the PIO had done his duty in transferring the application to the concerned PIO of the Labour department. He also said the first appeal was found lacking substance.
After the hearing before the FAA, the RTI application was transferred to numerous additional district magistrate (ADM) and sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) as well as to additional police commissioners (ACP) of various divisions of Delhi.
The SDM's stated that according to their records, no cases were registered and therefore the reply may be treated as nil. The ACP (north) responded that seven such cases were pending before the court, and the ACP (South) responded that two cases were pending before the Court. The applicant felt that the responses were contradictory and misleading.
Sinha then approached the CIC with her second appeal. She stated that she found it strange that the Department does not have the data regarding cases when it was clear from the responses of the ACPs that there have been FIRs filed. She stated that the original respondent 'the Directorate of Prosecution' should possess the consolidated data that was requested as it pertains to the prosecution of offenders for which the Directorate is responsible.
During the hearing, Mr Gandhi, the then CIC, noted that PIO and SDM(SV) has gave eight instances of having discovered bonded labours since 2008. BS Kain, PIO, of Directorate of Prosecution stated that no case had been referred to his department for prosecuting anybody under the Bonded Labour (Abolition) System Act 1976.
The CIC said, "About 11 officers representing various officers have come to the Commission but no one seems to have any clue whether those accused of violating the Bonded Labour Act are prosecuted or not. This appears to be a very serious matter and appears to indicate that though people are charged with having bonded labour no prosecutions may be taking place. Alternately it means the prosecution is taking place by an agency which none of the officers appears to be aware of."
While allowing the appeal, the Bench directed the divisional commissioner of revenue department to check if any prosecutions have been conducted for violation of this Act and provide the information to Sinha before 10 June 2011. In case no prosecutions are being conducted this should be stated, the CIC said in its order.
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000649/12392
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000649
Appellant : Priyanka Sinha
Respondent : BS Kain
PIO & Additional PP,
Directorate of Prosecution,
Tis Hazari Court