Tag: Excessive

Srinagar School Violates FFRC Orders, Charges Excessive Transportation Fee

[ad_1]
SRINAGAR: The Committee for Fixation and Regulation of Fee of Private schools (FFRC) Friday said that Presentation Convent Higher Secondary School Rajbagh was violating its orders by charging excessive transportation fee from the students.
In this regard, the Chairperson of the committee, Justice (Retd) Sunil Hali has given one last opportunity to the school to appear before FFRC to explain their position by or before May-02 and has warned the reputed private school of the consequences if it fails to appear before the Committee to explain its position why it arbitrarily hiked the transportation fee for the students.
Hali in a communique to the school has said that in pursuance to the complaint filed by the parent, notices were issued to the School Management.
The main grievance of the complainant is that School was charging Rs 1480 per month from the students as a bus fee, an action that violates the prescribed norms of FFRC.
Despite sending notices, the Principal Presentation Convent Higher Secondary School (PCHSS) didn’t appear before the FFRC.
Notably, the FFRC last year in October after a detailed discussion with the stakeholders including the school in question allowed a hike of 14% to the schools on the fee being charged by them in October 2019.
The PCHSS admitted that the school was charging Rs 1480 per month. As per the order, the school was required to hike the bus fee by 14 percent from the amount (1480 by 14%) which was being charged.
FFRC issued a notice on 26 April this month to the school directing it to explain the position as to why was the school charging fee over and above the prescribed fee by the Committee for Fixation & Regulation of Fee.

The next day the school came up with a reply that FFRC termed as irrelevant and out of context. The school in its reply referred to some dispute with the complainant pending in the court of law.
“It has no bearing on the present context in which the notice has been issued to you. The law will take its own course in case the complainant has committed any crime. Therefore it is irrelevant for the present proceedings,” Chairperson FFRC Sunil Hali observed.
He further stated that: “Your (PCHSS) reply to the notice issued by this office is that the order dated 6 October 2022 relating to the fixation of Transport Charges does not apply to your school as it applies to those schools who are providing their own transport. Also as per your explanation you have outsourced this business to some Private transporter. There is some misconception in understanding the charging of transport fee. The committee under its rules has to fix, determine and regulate the fee which includes the Transport Fee also. It is immaterial how the school provides this facility to the students whether it is school owned transport or the same is being outsourced. It is not your case that the Transport facility has been arranged by the parents with some private company then, of course, the school has no responsibility. You are directly charging transport fee from students, therefore it is your exclusive responsibility to charge fee which is permissible under law.”
FFRC further conveyed to school that: “What are your terms and conditions with the transport company is a bilateral issue between you and the transport company. You cannot escape the responsibility of charging fees as per the order dated 6 October 2022 which provides a hike of 14% to the existing fee charged by your school. As per the receipt issued by your school, it has come to the fore that you are charging Rs 4900 for two months.”
“Despite being asked to appear before the Chairperson FFRC you failed to appear and explain your position. You are given one last opportunity to appear before FFRC to explain your position by or before May 2 and in case you fail to appear then your action will be tantamount to violating the orders of the committee which entails consequences provided under the law which includes in first stage imposing of fine,” FFRC warned.
The FFRC Chairperson said, “You are given one last opportunity to appear before the committee to explain your position by or before May-02 at 3 pm.”
Hali said that in case, the school fails to appear then its action will tantamount to violating the orders of this committee which entails consequences provided under law which includes in first stage of imposing a fine.

[ad_2]
#Srinagar #School #Violates #FFRC #Orders #Charges #Excessive #Transportation #Fee
( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

April 29, 2023
Excessive force by police can’t be justified: Delhi HC on CAA protests

[ad_1]
New Delhi: Hearing petitions alleging police atrocities on students inside the Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) University here following anti-CAA protests in December 2019, the Delhi High Court on Monday said excessive use of force cannot be justified and the authorities concerned are accountable for their conduct.
Representing some of the petitioners in the matter, senior advocate Indira Jaising argued that the force used by police in the present instance was “wholly unproportional to alleged public good” and thus, urged the court to form a fact-finding committee comprising former judges to ascertain the “authentic” events for granting further relief.
A bench headed by Justice Siddharth Mridul was, however, told by the Delhi Police’s counsel that the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has already prepared a report on this aspect.
The bench, also comprising Justice Talwant Singh, directed that the NHRC report be given to the petitioners within four weeks and said there is “enough jurisprudence” on the issue of excessive use of force by police in the country.
“Excessive use of force cannot be justified at all. They (police officials) are accountable. These authorities are accountable for the excessive use of force. That is why you (petitioners) are here,” the court said.
Jaising said there was no last-mile implementation of the court’s decisions while clarifying that the NHRC report did not put an end to the relief sought in her plea.
“Please take a look at that report,” the court told the senior lawyer.
In her submissions, Jaising contended that there was “extreme form of violence” by police officials inside the Jamia campus, even after a threat to law and order was diluted when the protesting students returned to the university and the city police had no “backing of law” or permission from the vice-chancellor to enter the campus.

The police personnel trespassed and can be seen beating up students brutally and since there is no authentic fact finding in relation to the incident, the court may appoint a committee for the purpose, she said.
In another matter, the court granted time to the petitioner, represented by senior advocate Salman Khurshid, to file written submissions with respect to his prayer seeking guidelines on use of force and peaceful protests in universities.
In relation to the December 2019 incident, several petitions are pending before the court, seeking directions for setting up a special investigation team (SIT), a commission of inquiry (CoI) or a fact-finding committee, medical treatment, compensation and interim protection from arrest for the students and registration of FIRs against the erring police officers.
The petitioners are lawyers, Jamia students, residents of Okhla in south Delhi where the university is located and the imam of the Jama Masjid located opposite the Parliament House.
During the course of the hearing, the court questioned if the petitioners can directly seek action and FIRs against the allegedly erring police officials, without first making a complaint.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing in the matter for some of the petitioners, said the high court can decide the matter directly since it is public interest litigation (PIL) and the parties need not be “directly affected”.
Another counsel argued that there is medical evidence to show the injuries sustained by the students and the court can interfere in cases of violation of fundamental rights.
The petitioners had earlier said in the present case, there was a need for an SIT, which would be independent of police and the Centre, which by their conduct have shown that their investigation into the violence was “not independent”.
They had said such a move would “reassure the public” and restore the people’s faith in the system.
Some petitioners have also filed amendment applications for adding new prayers to the existing pleas, such as to set up an SIT and transfer the FIRs lodged against the students to an independent agency.
The Delhi Police has opposed the petitions and said the reliefs sought by the petitioners cannot be granted as chargesheets have been filed in connection with the violence cases and they should have sought whatever relief they wanted before the subordinate court.
It has opposed the setting up of an SIT to inquire into the alleged police atrocities as well as transferring the FIRs lodged against the students to an independent agency, and argued that a “stranger” cannot seek a judicial enquiry or investigation by a third-party agency.
The city police has said PIL petitioners cannot be allowed to choose the members of an SIT for investigating and prosecuting any alleged offence.
It has asserted that in the garb of student agitation, there was a well-planned and orchestrated attempt by some people with local support to intentionally perpetrate violence in the area and subsequently, comprehensive investigation was carried out by the Crime Branch of the Delhi Police in several FIRs.
The matter would be heard next on May 8.
On October 19, 2022, the Supreme Court had requested the high court to “hear out early” the petitions concerning the incidents of violence during the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), while noting that “these matters are pending before the high court for some time now”.
[ad_2]
#Excessive #force #police #justified #Delhi #CAA #protests
( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

March 13, 2023
DAK Warns Against Excessive Use Of Earphones On World Hearing Day

[ad_1]
SRINAGAR: On world hearing day, Doctors Association Kashmir (DAK) on Friday warned against excessive use of earphones.
“Overuse of earphones at higher volumes over prolonged period of time can result in hearing loss,” said DAK President Dr Nisar ul Hassan.
Dr Hassan said the younger generation is particularly vulnerable because they are glued to their personal listening devices like earphones, headphones and earbuds.
They plug these devices into their smartphones and listen to many hours at volumes exceeding the safe limit.
“Young people often choose volumes as high as 105 decibels,” he said
“The safe sound levels are around 85 decibels for adults and 75 decibels for children.”
The DAK President said more people are coming with hearing issues due to the overuse of earphones and headphones.
“Today’s earphone users are going to be tomorrow’s hearing aid users,” he said.

“According to a study published in the Journal BMJ Global Health, one billion young people are potentially at risk of hearing loss due to their excessive use of headphones and earbuds.”
Dr Nisar said hearing is the sense that connects us to the people.
Taking care of our hearing is key to maintaining healthy relationship(s) and general health and well-being.
He said there is an urgent need to prioritize safe listening practices to safeguard aural health
It is always preferable to avoid earphones, but those who need them should take precautions.
“Limit the usage time, keep the volume low and take breaks,” he said
“Every year on March 3, world hearing day is observed to raise awareness on ways of preventing deafness and promoting aural care through safe listening,” he added.

[ad_2]
#DAK #Warns #Excessive #Earphones #World #Hearing #Day
( With inputs from : kashmirlife.net )

March 3, 2023