Dozens of protesters gathered outside Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam on Wednesday to add their voices to the calls for the Navy to shut down its Red Hill facility.
Declare Covid-19 as natural calamity: Maharashtra CM to Modi
April 15, 2021
RELATED
By notifying so, the State can utilise SDRF for assisting the needy people.
Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi urging him to declare the Covid-19 pandemic as a natural calamity so that the government can use the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF) to provide financial assistance to the affected people. He has also demanded that the timeline for submitting the GST returns for March, April is extended by three months for small and medium taxpayers.
More
“In the view of the Covid-19 pandemic situation in the State, a mini lockdown is a necessity. A Covid-19 pandemic may be notified as a natural calamity for State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF). Accordingly, the State may be allowed to pay Gratuitous Relief (GR) of ₹100 per adult per day and ₹60 per child per day during the period of lockdown to all the Antodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) and Priorit
allocation made to FCI in lieu of subsidy. It has
been reduced to zero for 2021-22.
As on March 31, 2020, NSSF loans’ outstanding
amount lying with FCI was ₹ 2,54,600 crore.
SOURCE: UNION BUDGET DOCUMENTS
High drawal rate
During the three years, the quantity of food grains drawn by States (annually) hovered around 60 million tonnes to 66 million tonnes. Compared to the allocation, the rate of drawal was 91% to 95%. As the National Food Security Act (NFSA), which came into force in July 2013, enhanced entitlements (covering two-thirds of the country’s population), this naturally pushed up the States’ drawal. Based on an improved version of the targeted Public Distribution System (PDS), the law requires the authorities to provide to each beneficiary 5 kg of rice or wheat per month.
that s right. the independent counsel statute, that structure hasn t been in place for 20 years. my core concern first is that you were perfectly happy to use the tools available to the independent counsel when you worked there. after working there, discovered and enthusiasm for its invalidation as a constitutional matter. in trying to understand that, i ve dug into your writings, your opinions and speeches that you hold a view of the executive branch that you made clear in your phh dissent, which is in line in justin scalia s view, which is that there has to be in the president as the chief law enforcement officer of the united states, this is the unitary ex-secondive executive theory, not mine, to fire a what is appropriate in this traditional special counsel setting like the watergate period, is if the president
congress when we consider day in 1999 as being unrestrained, unaccountable, impermissible and the statue was not renewed, the morrison case was about a one-off statute that no longer exists. that s what you can talk about it. that s why i have talked about it. these are the remains of a once existing but no longer it s a dinosaur, in legal terms. what about your opinion on phh, it s really limited to independent agencies. the federal energy regulatory commission, the securities and exchange commission, a full range of independent agencies, the 1935 president of the supreme court established that those are permissible. traditionally they ve been