The way of promotion has been cleared for the staff teachers. Giving great relief, the High Court has rejected the stay order on the promotion. On the other hand, the order of the Collector has been considered correct.
Never Miss An Update After Joining This Group
Join Our What’s Group
Click Here
Employees-Teachers Promotion: Employees-teachers will soon get a big gift. Actually they will be given the benefit of promotion. In this regard, the stay in the promotion case has been set aside by the High Court. With the cancellation of the stay, now the way for the promotion of the staff teachers has been cleared.
Stay dismissed in promotion case
Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed the stay in the promotion case of teachers. Accepting the order of the Collector, the High Court has given instructions for promotion through the council. The High Court heard the matter. During this, teachers in Korba district will get the benefit of promotion and transfer. Earlier, a petition was filed in the court by the teachers against the order of the collector.
Promotion of teachers was canceled by collector
It may be mentioned that earlier thousands of assistant teachers in Korba district were given the benefit of promotion to the post of Pradhan Pathak Primary School. However, in this case the DEO had posted them in different schools of the district. Alleging discrepancy in the issued order, the promotion of all the teachers was canceled by the Korba collector.
Teachers’ plea
After which the teachers had reached the High Court against this order of the Collector. Along with filing a petition in the High Court, the teachers said that the right to cancel the process of promotion and posting does not come under the purview of the collector. At the same time, while hearing the petition, the single bench of the High Court had given a stay on the promotion process. However, after the completion of the hearing, the court had reserved the verdict. Now the stay has been quashed. On the other hand, the order of the Collector has been considered correct.
High court order
The court has said in its order that the decision of the Collector is correct. Teachers should be given post establishment only through the council. After the decision of the court, once again the process of promotion and posting will be started from 1000 assistant teachers to the post of head reader. At the same time its benefit will be given to the teachers.
Rihanna has explained her decision to perform at this year’s Super Bowl half-time show in Glendale, Arizona, after initially turning down the opportunity in 2019.
Speaking to British Vogue, the 34-year-old performer said that while “there’s a lot of mending to be done”, she felt it was “powerful to break down those doors and have representation at such a high, high level.”
“Two Super Bowls back-to-back, you know, representing the urban community, globally. It is powerful. It sends a really strong message,” she said, referring to the 2022 half-time show featuring Dr Dre, Kendrick Lamar, Mary J Blige, Snoop Dogg and Eminem. The recent birth of her son was also a factor: “Raising a young Black man is one of the scariest responsibilities in life. You’re like, ‘What am I leaving my kids to? This is the planet they’re gonna be living on?’ All of those things really start to hit differently.”
The announcement of Rihanna’s performance in September 2022 had been met with surprise from fans. She had previously declined the opportunity in solidarity with Colin Kaepernick, who alleged that he had been blackballed by the NFL due to his protests against racial injustice.
Unpacking her decision to stand in solidarity with Kaepernick in 2019, Rihanna explained that she “couldn’t be a sellout,” saying: “I couldn’t be an enabler. There’s things within that organisation that I do not agree with at all, and I was not about to go and be of service to them in any way.”
Elsewhere in the interview, Rihanna discussed her plans for new music, saying that she’d like to release a new album this year – her six-years-in-the-making follow-up to 2017’s Anti. “I have my ideas in my head, but I can’t say them out loud yet,” she said. “It’d be ridiculous if it’s not this year. But I just want to have fun. I just want to make music and make videos.”
Rihanna’s Super Bowl performance was widely praised, with the Guardian’s Adrian Horton describing the show as “a reminder of just how many immediately recognisable, still banging songs Rihanna delivered between the years 2007 and 2016.” Morwenna Ferrier, writing on the musician’s surprise pregnancy reveal, said that Rihanna was “past making a fashion statement. She took ownership of her body, and she did it in real time.”
[ad_2]
#Rihanna #explains #decision #reverse #Super #Bowl #boycott
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
Powell laid out the “lengthy list” of responsibilities that Brainard has carried at the Fed beyond monetary policy. In a statement, he cited his vice chair’s “stewardship of financial stability and the payments system, strengthening the financial system both domestically and globally, and helping to manage the immense operational agency challenges during the pandemic.”
She earned admirers and detractors along the way from both progressives and Republicans, signaling that Biden’s efforts to replace her could face some formidable obstacles in a closely divided Senate.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who sits on the Banking Committee overseeing the Fed, said she wants someone new at the Fed “soon.” Warren has been sharply critical of Powell’s efforts to kill inflation by cranking up rates at the fastest pace in four decades.
“Chairman Powell continues to signal that he will impose more extreme rate increases, and he still is in a position where he could tip our economy into recession,” Warren told POLITICO. “We need another voice at the Fed to help put the brakes on that.”
Here’s a list of potential candidates who have been the subject of speculation on Biden’s Fed nominee.
Mary Daly
The San Francisco Fed president is a labor economist and a close ally of Powell, who will likely be consulted on the choice. She is a potentially strong candidate to succeed Brainard because she’s viewed as being particularly concerned about avoiding damage to the job market — in central bank-speak, a “dove.” She also has ties to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, herself a former San Francisco Fed president, who Daly credits with helping advance her career. Yellen is also likely to weigh in on the nominee.
Austan Goolsbee
A chief economist to President Barack Obama, Goolsbee only became head of the Chicago Fed last month. But he’s already being talked about as a potential replacement for Brainard, since he too is perceived as dovish. He has highlighted the role that supply chain snarls have played in inflation and warned that acting too aggressively to rein in elevated prices caused by problems the Fed can’t solve could result in a recession — and still leave us with high inflation.
Susan Collins
The Boston Fed president was closely connected to the central bank even before she took her current job last year, regularly attending the exclusive Jackson Hole conference every August. Collins, the first Black woman to head a regional Fed branch, is an international economist whose work has focused on economic growth in developing countries. She previously served as provost and head of the public policy school at the University of Michigan.
Lisa Cook
Already a member of the Fed’s board, Cook fits the mold of being sympathetic to workers and willing to question the traditional narrative that low unemployment is a problem for inflation. A former economist at Michigan State University, Cook has long explored the impact of racial injustice on the economy. She faced a bruising confirmation battle last year but was ultimately confirmed in a 51-50 vote to become the first Black woman to get a vote on interest rate policy, two months before Collins took her post in Boston.
Betsey Stevenson
Another economist with ties to Michigan, Stevenson previously served as an economic adviser to Obama on issues related to social policy, the job market, and trade — making her a familiar face to Bidenworld. An expert on employment and wages, she also previously served as chief economist to the Labor Department. She’s currently a professor at the University of Michigan.
Karen Dynan
The Harvard economics professor has extensive ties to the Fed, having served on the staff of its board for 17 years. But she’s also got political connections, having served as chief economist at the Treasury Department from 2014 to 2017 and as a senior economist at the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers from 2003 to 2004.
Christina Romer
Romer, like Goolsbee, served as chief economist to Obama, giving her deep connections to the current White House. At the time, she worked closely with Jared Bernstein, who’s set to be nominated as Biden’s chief economist, to draft a plan for recovering from the 2008 financial crisis. Currently a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, she has done extensive research on the Fed and monetary policy.
Janice Eberly
Eberly preceded Dynan as chief economist at Treasury under Obama and is a prominent expert in macroeconomics. Now a professor at Northwestern University, she has previously been considered for openings at the Fed.
Brian Sack
Sack is a familiar face for the Fed who has dealt extensively with this administration as vice chair of a private-sector committee that advises Treasury on debt management. As a former head of the New York Fed’s markets group, he was responsible for implementing the central bank’s policy decisions, and he also served for seven years on the staff of the Fed board. He recently left investment management firm D.E. Shaw.
Seth Carpenter
Morgan Stanley’s global chief economist used to be a top monetary policy staffer at the Fed board and subsequently was acting assistant Treasury secretary for financial markets, meaning he has dealt intimately with central bank policy from multiple angles. His name has been floated for a number of jobs in this administration, given his range of experience. It’s unclear whether the administration would be comfortable appointing someone who works at a prominent megabank, though.
[ad_2]
#Biden #faces #key #economic #decision #ahead #reelection
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
Poland’s President Andrzej Duda signaled his country may not be able to deliver Western fighter jets to Ukraine to help it fend off Russia’s invasion.
“A decision today to donate any kind of jets, any F-16, to donate them outside Poland is a very serious decision and it’s not an easy one for us to take,” Duda told the BBC in an interview on Sunday.
Duda’s comments came after Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelenskyy traveled around Europe last week to lobby for additional military aid, including long-range artillery and ammunition, air defense systems, missiles and fighter jets.
Poland is one of Ukraine’s closest allies, and it is acutely aware of its own weapon stock. Noting that Poland currently has fewer than 50 jets, Duda said “this poses serious problems if we donate even a small part of them anywhere, because I don’t hesitate to say we have not enough of these jets.”
In any case, Duda said that any decision to send fighter jets “requires a decision by the Allies anyway, which means that we have to make a joint decision.”
[ad_2]
#Polands #Duda #Sending #fighter #jets #Ukraine #decision
( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )
New Delhi: India on Thursday questioned the World Bank’s decision to appoint a Court of Arbitration and a neutral expert under two separate processes to resolve differences between New Delhi and Islamabad over the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir.
Last week, India issued a notice to Pakistan seeking a review and modification of the 62-year-old Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) for management of cross-border rivers following Islamabad’s “intransigence” in handling disputes.
“I do not think they (World Bank) are in a position to interpret the treaty for us. It is a treaty between our two countries and our assessment of the treaty is that there is a provision of graded approach,” External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said.
India took the significant step of sending the notice to Pakistan conveying its intent to amend the treaty months after the World Bank announced appointing a neutral expert and a chair of Court of Arbitration to resolve the differences over the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects.
New Delhi has been particularly disappointed over the appointment of the Court of Arbitration.
“India’s Indus Water Commissioner issued a notice on January 25 for the modification of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 to his Pakistani counterpart,” Bagchi said at a media briefing while replying to a question on the matter.
“This notice was issued with the intent to provide an opportunity to Pakistan to enter into government-to-government negotiations to rectify ongoing material breach of the treaty,” he said.
Bagchi said India called upon Pakistan to notify a suitable date for the commencement of inter-state bilateral negotiations under article 12(III) of the treaty within 90 days.
“I am not aware of a response from Pakistan as yet. I am not aware of any response or comment by the World Bank,” he said.
The World Bank’s role is procedural and it appoints neutral experts or the chair of the court of arbitration in case of differences between India and Pakistan on issues relating to cross-border rivers.
“I do not think they (World Bank) are in a position to interpret the treaty for us. It is a treaty between our two countries and our assessment of the treaty is that there is a provision of graded approach,” Bagchi said.
New Delhi considers the start of the two concurrent processes to resolve the dispute a violation of the provision of the graded mechanism prescribed in the pact and wondered what will happen if the mechanisms come out with contradictory judgements.
“The world bank itself, around five-six years ago, acknowledged the problem of having two parallel processes. Our interpretation and assessment is that this is not in consonance with the provisions of the treaty and hence we have been talking about a graded approach,” Bagchi said.
The spokesperson said India’s position on the matter has not changed at all.
“I do not know whether the World Bank has changed its position on it,” he said.
India has not cooperated with the Court of Arbitration.
Under the pact, any differences need to be resolved under a three-stage approach. However, in the cases of Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, the World Bank started two concurrent dispute redressal processes at the insistence of Pakistan that India felt was a breach of the IWT, according to sources.
New Delhi: There has been no decision “as of now” on the implementation of a uniform civil code in the country, the government informed Rajya Sabha on Thursday.
In a written reply, Law Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government had requested the 21st Law Commission to undertake examination of various issues relating to uniform civil code and to make recommendations.
“The term of the 21st Law Commission ended on August 31, 2018. As per the information received from the Law Commission, the matter related to uniform civil code may be taken up by the 22nd Law Commission for its consideration,” he said.
“Therefore, no decision on implementation of uniform civil code has been taken as of now,” he said.
The term of the present law panel ends later this month. Government sources have indicated that the panel’s three-year term could be extended.
The current law panel was constituted on February 21, 2020, but its chairperson and members were appointed in November last year, months before the end of the panel’s term.
The 21st Law Commission undertook the examination of various issues relating to uniform civil code and uploaded a consultation paper, titled “Reform of Family Law”, on its website for wider discussions.
The implementation of a uniform civil code was a poll promise made by the ruling BJP in the 2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
SRINAGAR: Hasnain Masoodi, Member of Parliament today called on RR Bhatnagar Advisor to LG and highlighted adverse consequences of dust pollution and emissions from half a dozen cement factories and limestone mines operating in Khrew on agriculture, horticulture, public health, top soil, underground water and other components of ecosystem in the area.
He lamented that though the cement industry was collecting huge profit, at the cost of the health and economic avenues of the local population and use of local resources, yet very little is being done to compensate the local population adversely affected by the ever increasing pollution. Masoodi demanded that the administration should facilitate dialogue with the cement industry and persuade it to adopt the local area, contribute to its development and provide for the utilities and amenities like electricity, water etc to the affected population as is the practice across the country.
Masoodi emphasising that any further emissions and dust pollution would be beyond carrying capacity of the local environment, demanded that instead of auction to set up a new cement plant, JKCL area be used to set up an industrial estate with eco-friendly and non-polluting industrial units to be set up by local unemployed youth, and a part of it be earmarked for setting up degree college and other facilities in the area. Masoodi demanded that 51 DRW who have spent a good part of their life serving JKCL and have been left behind be, like other employees of JKCL deputed to other departments. He submitted a written request with the supporting documents in this regard. The Advisor assured to look into the issues raised including the plight of 51 left out DRW of JKCL.
New Delhi: A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court against the Centre’s decision to “ban” a BBC documentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots in the country, alleging it was “malafide, arbitrary and unconstitutional”.
The PIL filed by advocate ML Sharma also urged the apex court to call and examine the BBC documentary – both parts I and II – and sought action against persons who were responsible and were involved directly and indirectly with the 2002 Gujarat riots.
Sharma said that in his PIL he has raised a constitutional question and the top court has to decide whether citizens have the right under Article 19 (1) (2) to see news, facts and reports on the 2002 Gujarat riots.
He has sought direction to quash the order dated January 21, 2023 of the Ministry of the Information and Broadcasting, terming it as illegal, malafide, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
His plea said whether the central government can curtail freedom of press which is a fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (2) of the Constitution.
“Whether without having an Emergency declared under Article 352 of the Constitution of India by the president, Emergency provisions can be invoked by the central government?” the PIL said.’
It claimed the BBC documentary has “recorded facts” which are also “evidence” and can be used to further the cause of justice for the victims.
On January 21, the Centre issued directions for blocking multiple YouTube videos and Twitter posts sharing links to the controversial BBC documentary “India: The Modi Question”, according to sources.
Germany has declined to take a decision on whether to give Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine at a special international summit, prompting frustration in Kyiv and a warning from Poland that lives could be lost because of hesitation in Berlin.
It had been hoped in Europe and the US that Germany would at least allow Leopards owned by countries such as Poland and Finland to be re-exported, but despite days of pleading, Berlin’s newly appointed defence minister said no final decision had been taken.
Instead, Boris Pistorius said on the sidelines of the 50-nation meeting at the Ramstein US air force base in Germany on Friday that he had asked his ministry to “undertake an examination of the stocks” of the tanks available.
Germany’s Leopard 2
Although it was the closest Germany has come to suggesting it might be contemplating the use of the tanks in the conflict, it provoked a number of pointed comments from Ukraine and its allies as the meeting broke up without progress on what has come to be seen as the core issue.
Zbigniew Rau, Poland’s foreign minister, said Ukrainian lives would be lost because of Germany’s reluctance to act. “Arming Ukraine in order to repel the Russian aggression is not some kind of decision-making exercise. Ukrainian blood is shed for real. This is the price of hesitation over Leopard deliveries. We need action, now,” he tweeted.
Lloyd Austin, the US defence secretary, said after the meeting that there was “not a long time” available to provide Ukraine with extra equipment before the expected renewed offensives on both sides as the weather improves. “We have a window of opportunity between now and the spring,” he added.
The chair of the US joint chiefs of staff, Gen Mark Milley, said: “This year, it would be very, very difficult to militarily eject the Russian forces from every inch of Russian-occupied Ukraine.”
Milley told reporters that a “continued defence stabilising the front” would be possible, but that would depend on the delivery and training of military equipment to Ukraine.
Prior to the meeting, Ukraine’s president said pointedly that his country was waiting for a “decision from one European capital that will activate the prepared chains of cooperation on tanks”. In an address, Volodymyr Zelenskiy added it was “in your power” to at least make a decision in principle about tanks.
Poland, which had said it could donate its own Leopard 2 tanks without seeking permission from Germany, said it had participated in a meeting of defence ministers of 15 countries to make progress on the topic.
Mariusz Blaszczak, the country’s defence minister, said he was still “convinced that coalition-building will end in success”.
Berlin is at the centre of the tanks debate because it has yet to allow the re-export of any of the 2,000-plus German-made Leopard 2 tanks owned by Nato countries, holding out for the US to agree to send some of its own Abrams tanks in addition.
The US argues that its Abrams tanks, which run on jet engines, are fuel-inefficient and so difficult to supply, but earlier this week the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, directly asked the US president, Joe Biden, to send US tanks in return for sending its own Leopard tanks.
Yet Berlin said on Friday it had backed away from such a demand, leaving Germany to carry on considering the issue in isolation. Steffen Hebestreit, a German government spokesman, said Scholz was not making the decision on the delivery of Leopard 2 tanks dependent on whether or not the US delivered its M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine.
“At no time has there been any deal or demand that one thing would follow on from another,” the spokesperson said. “I find it difficult to imagine a German chancellor dictating any conditions or making demands to an American president.”
Berlin, he further insisted, did not expect Poland to carry out its threat to deliver Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine unilaterally, without receiving the necessary export licence from Germany. Hebestreit said: “All our partners will surely want to behave in a law-abiding way.”
Leopard 2 inventories
There had been hope that Germany might, as a compromise, allow export licences to be issued to European owners of the Leopard 2, while withholding its own Leopard tanks.
But in the end that too was dashed at Friday’s meeting of 50 western defence ministers in the Ukraine international contact group. Ukraine says it wants 300 tanks to help force out the Russian invaders in the spring, although western analysts say the supply of 100 would be enough to make an immediate difference.
Zelenskiy had begun the meeting, arguing that urgent action was necessary because “Russia is concentrating its forces, last forces, trying to convince everyone that hatred can be stronger than the world”.
It was vital to “speed up” weapons supplies, Zelenskiy added, because the war with Russia amounted to a battle between freedom and autocracy. “It is about what kind of world people will live in, people who dream, love and hope.”
Earlier this week, Britain said it would donate 14 of its Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine, while Poland said it wanted to follow suit with a similar number of German-made Leopard 2s. Finland has said it wants to donate tanks, while France has indicated that it is considering supplying some of its own Leclerc armoured units.
But it is the Leopards that are considered crucial because they are the dominant tank model in Europe. Germany itself has 321 Leopards in active service, plus another 255 in storage, out of a Nato total of more than 2,300.
Austin also announced a fresh $2.5bn (£2bn) military aid package to Ukraine, including 59 more Bradley fighting vehicles, on top of 50 already announced earlier this month, and 90 Stryker eight-wheeled armoured personnel carriers and 350 Humvees.
The Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said the war in Ukraine was escalating, and argued that Nato countries were playing a direct role in the conflict, although the western military alliance is not at war with Russia.
“It really is developing in an upward spiral. We see a growing indirect, and sometimes direct, involvement of Nato countries in this conflict,” Peskov said.
“We see a devotion to the dramatic delusion that Ukraine can succeed on the battlefield. This is a dramatic delusion of the western community that will more than once be cause for regret, we are sure of that.”
[ad_2]
#Ukraine #frustrated #Germany #holds #decision #supply #tanks
( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )
