You scratch an Indian, the caste comes out , irrespective of whether the person is a Hindu, Muslim , Christian , Sikh , Budhist ,Jain , Agnostic or even an Atheist. Community life in India is primarily based on caste not religion.

The majority of Christian and Muslim Converts in India have come from the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes populations . Though most of them or their predecessors converted to escape the caste stigma,  the Indian society has hitherto refused to treat them differently. On the ground the converts continue to experience the discrimination they faced before conversion.This has been proved time and again though numerous sociological studies and statements of numerous converts.

In Tamil Nadu, Andra Pradesh and even in Kerala the Christian converts from scheduled caste and other backward class populations are treated as lesser human beings. In Andhra you even have separate churches for Christian converts .

The exclusion of scheduled caste converts to Christianity and Islam from the  satutory provisions for the welfare and progress of the scheduled caste populations in the Constitution of India originated from the 1950 8Constitution ( Scheduled Castes ) Order , issued by the President of India under Article 341 of the Constitution , via Clause 3 which introduced a religious dimention stating , No person who professes a religion different from the Hindu religion shall be deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste.

This has been upheld by the Supreme Court of India on 24 March 2026 in spite of the fact  a number of writ petitions challenging constitutional validity of the 1950 Presidential order  itself is under challenge in the Supreme Court ,  ( these petitions have been pending in the Supreme Court for the last more than three decades ) and several Commissions appointed by the Union government has categorically held that caste discrimination exists within Christianity and Islam in India and the exclusion of Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims from SC status is unconstitutional.

In 1955 the First Backward Classes Commission ( Kaka Kalelkar  Commission ) observed that the rigid caste system and the practice of untouchability were widely prevalent among the Indian Christian and Muslim communities.

In 1980 the Second Backward Classes Commission  ( Mandal Commission ) observed that the Hindu caste stratification and the resultant discrimination and ineqalities were common among Indian Christians and Muslims. On the recommendations of the Mandal Commission reservations were extended to OBCs across religions including Christian and Muslim converts. However,  the Union government did not do any thing to change the SC criteria for Christian and Muslim Converts leaving the most oppressed Dalit converts without the statutory proection of SC.

Further the Hindu only rule under the 1950 Presidential.order was amened twice to include Dalit converts to strictly indigenous religions . In 1956 the first amendment was made by Parliament to include Dalit Sikhs following socio political

Mobilisation by Mazhabi and Ramdasia Sikhs who continued to face severe caste discrimination. This amendment recognised that caste discrimination continued outside the Hindu fold.

In 1990 during the V.P.Singh government , a second amendment to the 1950 Presidential.order extended SC status to Dalit Budhists while continuing to overlook the demands of the Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims . The granting of the SC status to Dalit Sikhs and Dalit Budhists  was done on a rather strange logic that both Sikh and Budhist religions were indigenous while Christianity and Islam are  FOREIGN. Mercifully , nobody argued that the Dalit Christians and Dalit Muslims are  also foreigners . In the toxic atmosphere under which we live today one should not be surprised if every Muslim and Christian is called a foreigner.

In this context it is pertinent to recall the finding of the National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities ( the Ranganath Misra Commission ) in 2007. The Commission categorically stated that the non – inclusion of  Dalit Christians and Muslims in the SC list was a discrimination based on religion and therefore unconstitutional.The Commission recomened the total deletion of the Paragraph 3 of the 1950 Presidential order . Caste , the Commission further pointed out is a deeply rooted sociological reality in India that trancends all religious boundaries. Successive Union governments , Congress and the BJP have refused to implement this important recommendation which would have rectified the faltline in the 1950 Presidential Order.

For some inexplicable reason the the Union government is opposed to granting Dalit status to Dalit Muslims and Dalit Christians. On 3rd August 2021 the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment issued a statement , The benefits of Centrally Sponsored Schemes  ( CSS ) meant for the welfare and development of Scheduled Castes cannot be extended to converted Christians from scheduled castes.

In  2022 the Union government filed another affidavit  in the Supreme Court arguing that the socioeconomic disadvantages and the nature of untouchability faced by these converts cannot be equated with the experience of Dalit Hindus and the 1950 Presidential Order is not unconstitutional.

In October 2022 the Union government appointed a Commission of Inquiry headed by former Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan to gather contemporary empirical data on the question of exclusion of Dalit Christians and Muslim converts from the SC status. The SC order of 24 March 2026 has come even as the Supreme Court is awaiting the Justice Balakrishnan Commission report . The term of the Commission has been extended twice , the last in October 2025 for six months .

The post The SC order on Scheduled Caste Status of Dalit Muslim and Christian converts is Unconstitutional and Hasty. appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan ( VBSA) ,Bill 2025 to replace the University Grants Commission ( UGC ) , All India Council for Technical Education, ( AICTE ) and the National Council for Teacher Education , ( NCTE ) will centralise higher education in the country overriding federal structure and adversally affecting the rights of the states and doing away with whatever autonomy our higher educational institutions enjoys.

The Bill repeals the three Acts providing for the constitution of these bodies. However , the Bill exempts legal and medical education from its purview .These will continue to be regulated under separate Acts.

The Bill is  to establish the VBSA ( Commission ) as the apex regulatory body for higher education. The Commission will have the following three Councils : (i) Regulatory Council which will function as the common regulator for higher education , ( ii )  Accreditation Council to oversee the system of accreditation , and ( iii ) Standards Council to determine academic standards. The functions of the Councils include : providing strategic direction for higher education and research , developing a roadmap for transforming higher educational institutions and suggesting schemes for improving quality ofeducation.

Currently, the UGC also allocates Grants to universities and colleges. Under the Bill , the Commission or its Councils will not have any powers regarding funding to Higher Education Institutions.

So far so good. But what is most objectional about the Bill is it tramples on the states’ powers. Education according to the Indian Constitution is a State subject. Considering the diversity in our country, language, culture , climate , natural resources , food and dress habits it was very appropriate that the states were given freedom to design and impement educational programmes suited to their particular States or region.

On  Thursday , 19 March 2026 the main opposition party in the Parliament ,the Congress in a statement said that the proposed regulatory framework of higher education in the country represents constitutional overeach by the Union Government . The Bill was introduced without consulting the states , bureaucratises higher education and hands over financial powers to the Education Ministry controlled by bureaucrats and politicians , Jairam Ramesh , Communications Chief of the Congress said in his statement on the Bill.

” The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education’s annual demand for Grants report on the Department of Higher Education presented on Wednesday revealed a shockingly High number of vacancies in key regulatory agencies like the UGC, and AICTE.”

Ramesh said the proposed Bill , as stated in its Objects and Reasons , is introduced for passing in Parliament under entry 66 of the Union list in the Seventh schedule of the Constitution which gives specific legislative powers to Parliament that is only for  “Coordination and determinationof standards in institutionsfor higher education or research and scientific  and Technical institutions .”

The VBSA Bill  gives the Commission powers far beyond the scope prescribed in the constitution and specifically encroaches on the powers of the states, he added.

” Entry 44 of List I -Union List expressly prohibits the Parliament from law making on matters of incorporation , regulation and winding up of universities, and List II – State List expressly gives this law making power to State Legislatures. The Bill is therefore violative of the federal structure of the Constitution “, the statement pointed out.

The current bill the staement added envisions only three Councils, with the exception of a council for grant giving. Consequently , grant giving powers will be taken away from autonomous bodies like the UGC and AICTE governed by acdemics to the Minstry run by the bureaucrats and politicians . This centralisation of financial powers is a departure from the current  practice and a violation of norms set by the National Education Policy ( N E P ). Ramesh poited out.

The Bill was referred to a parliamentary standing Committee headed by Bharaiya Janata Party M.P. Dagubati Purandeswari following its introduction in the Lok Sabha on 15 December 2025.As of March 2026 the committee is conducting hearings focssing on the funding mechanisms and the role of the states in higher education.

Concerns have been raised about potential threats to the autonomy of the Institutes of national importance like  the Indian Institute of Technologies ( IITs ) and the Indian Institute of Managements ( IIMs ) due to clause 49 in the Bill which gives proposed new Commission overriding authority to regulate accreditation and standards.

Perhaps the most controversial issue that concerns academics is the issue of funding universities and colleges. While funding has been taken out of the purview of the new Commission the union government has not provided any information as to how funds will be utilised and what mechanism will be adoped to distribute funds . Funding it is proposed will now be handed over to the education ministry which will be under the total control of bureaucrats and politicians . Such an arrangement it is feared  will go against the interests of opposition ruled states as is happening in other areas like employment guarantee schemes .

Lastly, the Commission and the Councils are according to the bill will  be dominated by bureaucrats and administrators instead of acdemics who were hitherto in charge of Higher Education bodies like the UGC and the AICTE. Representation of States in the Commission and the Councils are also very minimal according to the  Bill which further will lead to centralisation of Higher education.

The post VBSA Bill 2025 : Goodbye to Autonomy of States in Higher Education appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

The post The SC order in the NCERT textbook case Impinge on Academic Freedom appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

The Supreme Court on 29 December 2025 in an unprecedented but welcome move suo moto stayed its on  20 November order on the definition of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges. The November ruling had accepted an elevation based definition proposed by the Union Goverment which caused widespread concern among the people of the affected States of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Delhi.

The 20 November order had to the consternation of the people of the four states and the environmental as well as legal experts had adopted a very narrow definition classifying only landforms with an elevation of 100 metres or more above local relief as ” Aravalli Hills ”

Following widespread protests across the four states irrespective of  party or caste affiliations the Supreme Court perhaps for the first time took note of public concerns  and acknowledged the need for clarification on whether the naarow definition ( 100 metres elevation ) would exclude ecologically fragile areas allowing unregulated mining as well as bilding construction in between the Aravalli Hills.

According to the  latest SC order a High Powered independent Committe consisting of experts in various fields is to be formed to redefine the Aravalli Hills considering all aspects of its ecological and environmental impact andress various ambiguities with regard to the Union laws and state laws for the protection and preservation of environmental and ecological balance essential for sustainable development .

The stay order means that no irreversible administrative or ecological actions can be taken by any authority including Union and state governments based on the framework upheld by the Supreme Court on 20 November.

Untill the matter is resolved there will be a moratorium on the grant of any new mining leases or renewal of old ones across the entire Aravalli landscape in Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Gujarat. Existing legal.mining could be carried out only under strict regulations.

The 20 November 2025 judgement was aimed at laying down a uniform definition of the  740 kilometre long Aravalli Ranges across the states to curb rampant illegal.mining. It also directed the Ministry of Environment , Forest and Climare Change ( MoEF&CC ) to prepare a Management Plan for Sustainable Mining ( MPSM ) .

However, the narrow 100 metres hight criterion specified for the Aravalli Hills became the subject of widespread protests and criticism. The 100 metres height criterion would have rendered 90 percent of the small hills of the Aravalli Ranges and low lying areas without the protection of the environmental laws, which are ecologically essential for preventing further desertification and recharging ground water.

The SC had in its 20 Novenber order had simply without applying it’s mind accepted the recommendations of the Union Ministry of Environment , Forest and Climate Change on the definition of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges to protect the world’s oldest mountain system.

The Committe had recommended that “Aravalli Hills ” be defined as any landform in designated Aravalli dtstricts with an elevation of 100 metres or more above its local relief , and an ” Aravalli Range” will be a collection of two or more such hills within 500 metres of each other. This narrow definition ecologists, environmentalists the affected ordinary people pointed out will open up lage areas of the ecologically fragile moutain ecosystem to mining and real estate development which have already caused irreparable damage .

The Union Goverment it was further pointed out made the new narrow definition of hills and ranges without any scientific and ecological studies or public consultation. Therefore if the new definition was accepted it will destroy large parts of the Aravalli Hills and Ranges through granite and sand mining and real estate development environmentalists argued.

According to eminent Environmentalist Bhavreen Kandhari the manner in which illegal mining has been going on in the Aravallis is an administrative and governance failure.” The judicial intervention was much needed. It is a welcome step by the Supreme Court of India to stay its earlier order , but it is important that the committee which is going to be formed should have ecologists , environmentalists and not just bureaucrats “, shed added.

Neelam Ahluwalia of the ”  People for Aravalli ” , described the SC stay of its own order is interim win. ” What we actually demand is that the Union and state governments ban all mining in the Aravallis . We need a completely detailed , independent assessment  comulative of the entire range , on people’s health and the ecosystem to determine how much of the Aravalli has already been destroyed ! ” she demanded.

Ecological restoration practitioner , Vijay Dhasmana said there are two lobbies , the mining and real estate which are pressing for a new definition of the Aravallis . However , the fact remains that geological features of the Aravallis have not been defined yet. The mining and real estate lobies strongly belive what is good for their profit is also good for the Aravallis !

The SC order staying its  own order  on Aravallis made on the advise of the Union Ministry of Environment have to be viewed very positively by the people of the country . For one in recent times the Supreme Court’s and High Courts have been very reluctant to go against the government even when it’s orders have been causing unavoidable hardships to the people .

In the 80s and 90 we witnessed the Supreme Court and High Courts taking suo moto action on issues of public interest and even when individual freedoms are in danger. The Aravalli stay order shows that the SC had an open mind on matters of public interest.

Considering the Aravalli Hills and Ranges have been subjected to unbridled human greed for decades now one can only hope that SC will.also appoint a Monitoring Committe to ensure that it’s orders are executed in the letter and spirit.

The post The Supreme Court becomes Pro-People on Aravalli Hills and Ranges appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

The new Bill introduced by the Union government , Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission Gramin ( VB – GRAMG ) to replace the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Emloyment Guarantee Act 2005 ( MGNREGA ) nullifies the concept of the Right to Work guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.

RAMG, in spite of the devine name paradoxically destroys the scheme for guaranteed work for a minimum of 100 days in a year for the rural unemployed poor. RAMG  completely changes the  character of MGNREGA.

The existing scheme to provide minimum employment to the rural poor is based on demand for employment . In other words the Union government is duty bound to provide funds for employment  of the rural poor according to the demand because it is basically a centrally sponsored scheme.

Before the beginning of every financial year the states prepare labour budgets which are aproved by the Union government. Later if more people seek work under the right to work programme the the labour budgets are updated. Thus according to demand for work the budgets are increased. This is one of the key features of MGNREGA.

But under the RAMG the scheme will be converted to an allocation based programme and what is very disturbing is that the norms for allocation of funds have not been made clear yet . It is feared that the Union government will weaponise the scheme to punish unbending state governments specially ruled by the opposition parties.

Presently the wage bill for the scheme is paid by he Union government and the expenses for the implementation of the scheme is shared on the ratio of 75: 25 by the Union and the States. However,  under RAMG the entire expenditure, wage bill plus administrative cost will be shared by the Union and the States on a 60: 40 basis . This will result in a huge financial burden on the states, especially the poorer states like Bihar , Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.

From a bottom up scheme the RAMG has become a top down programme , according to Jayanti Gosh , Development economist. Though the new Bill envisages a minimum employment for 125 days considering that the average days  under MGNREGA per year have been only 40 to 50 in future we will get much less ,she added.

” You can’t make decisions like this by sitting in Delhi. This is a stupid way to run a country as complicated and diverse as India. This is a terrible blow for fedaralism  and therefore has to be opposed”, she said referring to Section 4(5) of the VB-G RAM G Bill which states : ” The Central Government shall determine the statewise normative allocation for each financial year , based on objective parameters as may be prescribed by the Central Government.”

Under RAMG the Government of India will have full powers to decide the financial allocations , the wage rates , power to decide where and when the scheme is to be implemented . Further RAMG gives the Union government unbridled powers to do what it wants without any obligations .All oblgations are of state governments and without the required funding the scheme will practically remain on paper.

For some inexplicable reason RAMG proposes a sixty day pause during the peak agriculture seasons of sawing and harvesting. In a country like India with varying climatic conditions and diffrent crops and different sawing and harvesting seasons in different parts of the country for which 60 days in a year will pause RAMG scheme ? One is reminded of the businessman on being asked why he wasted money on advertisement said  , ” I know half the money I spent on  advertisement is a   waste, but I do not know which half !”

The Bill proposes division of work into four categories : water security, rural infrastructure , livelyhood infrastructure and disaster resilience. This division of work is inadequate to define work under the new scheme

The MGNREGA provided employment as a matter of right and this right cannot be taken away by a mere majority vote , therefore this bill is reprehensible according to Prabhat Patnaik , Professor Emiretus Jawaharlal Nehru University.

RAMG, in spite of the devine name will spell disaster for the wreched of the country.

The post RAM-G-A ROAD to DISASTER appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

Betrand Russel,  plilosopher and logician was arrested in 1961 at the ripe age of 89 for his involvement in an anti-nuclear weapons demonstration. He was charged with the breach of the peace and after refusing to be of good behaviour , was sentenced to Brixton Prison , which he served in the prison’s hospital. His imprisonment alongwith with his wife’s raised significant public awareness for the anti-nuclear movement .

At the prison the warden filling the entry form asked Russel what his religion was, Russel replied ” agnostic”. Exclaimed the warden ” Oh yet another religion ! “.

As if in our country we do not have enough divisions , disputes and controversies in the name of caste  , creed , language , gender and religion the Jammu and Kashmir unit ofthe Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP ) has invented yet another controversy in the matter of merit based admission to the SHRI  Mata Vaishno Devi Institute of Medical Excellence ( SMVDIME ).

The controversy arose after the admission of 50 students to the first batch of the MBBS course by the Institute of Medical Excellence on the basis of the result of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET ) to the 2025 -26 academic session . Of the 50 students admitted solely on the criterion of merit 42 were Muslims from Kashmir 7 Hindus from Jammu and 1 Sikh.

The National Medical Mission  ( NMM) had earlier rejected a proposal by the Vishno Devi Institute of Medical Excellence, Katra seeking to place 100 percent of its MBBS seats under the All India Quota to be filled through the Medical Councilling Committe (MCC ).The Institute’s request to the NMC came following protests after it was revealed that the majority of the students  who were eligible for admission on merit belonged to the Muslim community. Already 36 candidates from Kashmir and three cadidates from Jammu have taken admission.

The protests supported by the  Udhampur BJP MLA, is also backed by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajarang Dal. The protesters have very strangely argued in violation of the existing statutes and rules of the  Institute of Excellence admisiions to the Institute should not be done on merit and should not be dominated by Muslim students irrespective of merit because the insitute is built with donations from the devotees of Vishano Devi who are Hindus.

The protesters have also demanded reservations for Hindu students at the Institute of Medical Excellence. However , since the Vishano Devi Institute of Excellence is not a Minority Institution under current rules and regulations it is impossible to reserve any seats for Hindus even though they are a minority in  Jammu and Kashmir. Under the existing bylaws of the Institute 85 percent seats are reserved for the students from the State and the remaining 15 percent are left for the All – India Quota.

On Tuesday , 2 December  a number of prominent Hindu academics of Jammu defended the Institute Administration for making admissions purely on the basis of merit and not based on religion .Retired Zonal Education Officer, Bimala Sharma , recipient of a National Teacher Award regretted that the students of the Jammu andKashmir were being divided on the basis of religion. It is very unfortunate that a section of people were trying to sacrifice the future of talented NEET qualified students on the basis of religion. ” The students have got admission on the basis of merit and they have every right to complete their studies ,” she added.

Dr.Himla Sharma former Principal of Government Degree College , Parade pointed out that since the admissions were made as per the regulations of the National Medical Commission and the NEET regulations the students should be allowed to pursue their studies without any outside interference .Tinkering with well laid out procedure for admission will ruin the entire education system in the state ,  Aggarwal warned.

Kashmiri Hindu Social Activist and spokesman of the Nationalist Congress Party ( NCP ) , Engineer Rishi Kaul said that division on the basis of religion in education is totally unacceptable.” Education should not have anything to do with religious beliefs it is highly inappropriate to give this issue a political or religious colour ,” he added.

The Congress Party accused the BJP for giving a communal colour to the issue of admissions to the Vishno Devi Institue of  Medical Excellence to cover it’s failures . The Jammu and Kashmir Pradesh Congress Committee Chief Spokesman Ravinder Sharma  said the  Union government led by the BJP was responsible for creating the communal devide in the state .” When there was no illegality in the allotment of seats in medical education then where was the need to raise the issue of religion .” he wondered.

Omar Abdullah, the Chief Minster of Jammu and Kashmir asserted that admission to medical colleges must be based on merit as determined by examinations like the National  Eligibility cum Entrance Test and not on a student’s religion. He further argued that the Indian Constitution and the State Act that established the Sri Mata Vishno Devi University do not permit the distribution of seats along religious lines.

Responding to demands made by  right wing Hindu organisations that seats should be reserved for Hindu students in the Institute Umar Addillah said that it should return all government grants and free land provided to it and change its status tio a minority institution.

Abdullah warned that denying admission to meritorious students based on their faith could have negative social consequences and potentially push them towards radicalism.

Ends…

The post Merit Versus Religion : an entirely Novel Controversy in Education appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

Joseph Maliakan

The Supreme Court of India on Thursday 27 November 2025 suggested the Union government  make a law to proect the dignity of of the DISABLED. Derogatory remarks against persons with disabilities and rare genetic disorders should be made a punishable offence on the lines of  the Scheduled Caste – Scheduled Tribes ( Prevention of Atrocities  ) Act., 1989, a Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said.

The SC-ST Act crminalises casteist slur, acts of discrimination , humiliation, and violence against the members of the SCs and STs.The offences under the Act are non-bailable. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta , appearing for the Union government agreed with the suggestion and said that humour cannot be at the cost of some one’s dignity especially of the disabled and the disadvantaged in the society.

The Supreme Court made the observation on a petition filed by M/s SMA Cure  India Foundation , which works for persons affected by spinal Muscular  Atrophy  ( SMA ) disease. The petition was filed following jokes made by ” India’s Got Latent” host Samay Raina and other social media influencers ,Vipin Goel, Balraj Paramjit Singh gai, Sonali Thakkar and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar. The Court ordered all these comedy hosts to host at least two fundraising events each month to benefit persons with disabilities. It urged the comedians to invite persons with disabilities in their programmes and share their success stories to raise awareness and funds.

The comedians,  Chief Justice Surya Kant said must begin this initiative before the court hears the matter again. ” We hope and expect that a few memorable events will take place before our next hearing. This is a social responsibility we are placing on you  , not a penal one . You are all respected members of the society .If you have gained significant popularity, then use that influence to benefit others .” he added.

Raina’s joke about a two month old SMA child needing a Rs.16 crore gene therapy injection drew severe criticism as it trivialised the plight of patients and their families efforts at public fund raising.

Such content the Cure SMA India Foundation argued violated fundamental rights , including the right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. And in August 2025 the Supreme Court directed these comedians to issue unconditional.public apologies on social media platforms for mocking persons with disabilities and threatened to penalise them in case of non-compliance.The comedians submitted affidavits showing their willingness to engage in fund raising and awareness raising activities for the welfare of the disabled.

Representing the Cure CMA India Foundation,  Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh said that dignity was more important than money in the case of the disabled : ” Samay Raina claims to have donated Rs.2.50 lakh , but our concern is with the dignity of the disabled persons not e money”

She  said many children suffering from SMA have achieved great accomplishments in their lives. The parents of SMA patients are managing funds through crowdfunding and the Foundation refused accept the Rs.2.5 lakh donation by Raina because the issue was not of money but that of dignity.

Aparajita Singh further said that of the children who suffered from SMA is working at Microsoft, another is studying at Michigan State University, one is a classical singer, another is an Assamese writer and publisher and yet another is pursuing a doctorate in Bioinformatics .The parents of these children managed funds for their treatment through crowdfunding. When people like Raina make humiliating jokes about such kids , raising funds for them becomes difficult , Aparijita said. There was a need for a dedicated platform which can raise Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR  ) funds for treatment of children suffering from rare complicated diseases.

In this context the CJI directed the comedians to be more careful about their conduct in future The Chief Justice also said that he was aware of the comments made mocking even the Supreme Court of India by Raina in Canda !

At the end of the arguments the Court said ” As regards to the issues raised by cure SMA India Foundation , the learned senior Counsel Ms.Aparajita Singhhas handed over a brief notedepictingthe success stories of those about whom undesirable and avoidable YouvTube shows were held by some of the private respondents . During the course of the hearing it has been rightly suggested that thereshould be a dedicated fund /corpus that may be created bythe concerned Ministry , or if it is already created , it can be given wide publicity, inviting corporate entities and individuals to generously donate in that fund which is exclusively meant forthe treatment of the speciallyabled persons , like those suffering from SMA.

In this regard the order said that ” We leave it to the the respondents 6 to 10 to persuade and inite the specially abled persons on their platforms to promote the cause of generating funds to provide timely and quality treatment to the specially abled like thisesuffering from SMA.

” We are quite sure that if respondents no 6 to 10 are repentent and show their sincerity and commitment to the case , the specially abled persons who have made landmark achivements in life will also accept to come on the platforms for the purpose of wideg publicity in the cause.”

Ends….

The post THE DISABLED too DESERVE DIGNITY : SUPREME COURT appeared first on The Gulf Indians.