Given India’s anti-defection laws, the Educational Tribunals Bill, 2010 should have sailed through smoothly in the Rajya Sabha.  The Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha on August 26 in spite of opposition from many MPs who raised a number of pertinent issues. However, in a surprising turn of events the Bill faced opposition from Congress Rajya Sabha MP K. Keshava Rao (along with other Opposition members).  It forced the Minister of Human Resource Development Shri Kapil Sibal to defer the consideration and passing of the Bill to the Winter session of Parliament. Such an incidence raises the larger issue of whether an MP should follow the party line or be allowed to express his opinion which may be contrary to the party.  Last year, Vice President Hamid Ansari had expressed the view that there was a need to expand the scope for individual MPs to express their opinion on policy matters.  One of the ways this could be done, he felt, was by limiting the issuance of whips “to only those bills that could threaten the survival of a government, such as Money Bills or No-Confidence Motions.”  There are others who feel that MPs should not oppose the party line in the House since they represent the party in the Parliament. (See PRS note on The Anti-Defection Law: Intent and Impact). The Educational Tribunals Bill, introduced in the Lok Sabha on May 3, 2010, seeks to set up tribunals at the state and national level to adjudicate disputes related to higher education.  The disputes may be related to service matters of teachers; unfair practices of the higher educational institutions; affiliation of colleges; and statutory regulatory authorities.  The tribunals shall include judicial, academic and administrative members.  The Bill bars the jurisdiction of civil courts over any matters that the tribunals are empowered to hear.  It also seeks to penalise any person who does not comply with the orders of the tribunals. (See the analysis of PRS on the Educational Tribunals Bill). The Bill was referred to the Standing Committee on Human Resource Development, which submitted its report on August 20, 2010.  Although the report expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of inputs from states and universities and made a number of recommendations on various provisions, the HRD Ministry rejected those suggestions. Some of the key issues raised by the Standing Committee are as follows:

  • The Committee observed that no specific assessment about quantum of litigation has been carried out. It recommended that before setting up tribunals, the magnitude of cases and costs incurred in litigation should be assessed. A minimum court fee should be fixed to ensure viability of the tribunals.
  • The Committee pointed out that the status of existing tribunals is unclear. Also, since the number of educational institutions vary from state to state, the Committee felt that one educational tribunal per state cannot be made uniformly applicable.
  • The Committee stated that there is no clear rationale for fixing a minimum age limit of 55 years for members of the tribunals. It recommended that competent people with adequate knowledge and experience, irrespective of age, should be considered.
  • In case there is a vacancy in the chairperson’s post, other two members shall hear cases in the state educational tribunals. However, this leaves the possibility of cases being heard without a judicial member (since chairperson is the only judicial member). The Committee pointed out that a recent Supreme Court judgment states that every two-member bench of the tribunal should always have a judicial member. Also, whenever any larger or special benches are constituted, the number of technical members should not exceed the judicial member. The Committee were of the view that certain provisions of the Bill violate the Supreme Court judgment and should be re-thought.
  • The Committee recommends that the term “unfair practice” should be defined in the Bill so that it is not open to interpretation by the courts.
  • The Selection Committee to recommend panel for national tribunal includes the Chief Justice of India and Secretaries, Higher Education, Law and Justice, Medical Education and Personnel and Training as members. The Committee recommended that there should be adequate representation of the academia in the Selection Committee.
  • The Committee proposed that the government needs to identify the lacunae of the existing tribunal systems and ensure that orders of the tribunals have some force.

As of April 30, Telangana has 1,012 confirmed cases of COVID-19 (9th highest in the country).  Of these, 367 have been cured, and 26 have died.  In this blog, we summarise some of the key decisions taken by the Government of Telangana for containing the spread of COVID-19 in the state and relief measures taken during the lockdown.

Movement Restrictions

For mitigating the spread of COVID-19 in the state, the Government of Telangana took the following measures for restricting the movement of people in the state.

Closure of commercial establishments: On March 14, the government ordered for the closure of cinema halls, amusement parks, swimming pools, gyms and museums until March 21 which was later extended to March 31.

Lockdown:  To further restrict the movement of people, the state and central governments announced lockdown in the state and country.  The lockdown included: (i) closing down state borders, (ii) suspension of public transport services, (iii) prohibiting congregation of more than five people.  The entities providing essential commodities and services were exempted from these restrictions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Starting from April 20, the central government allowed certain activities in less-affected districts of the country.  However, on April 19, the state government decided not to allow any relaxation in Telangana until May 7.

Health Measures

Telangana Epidemic Diseases (COVID-19) Regulations, 2020: On March 21, the government issued the Telangana Epidemic Diseases (COVID-19) Regulations, 2020.  The regulations are valid for one year.  Key features of the regulations include:

 (i) All government and private hospitals should have dedicated COVID-19 corners,

 (ii) People who had travelled through the affected areas should be home quarantined for 14 days,

(iii) Procedures to be followed in the containment zones among others.

Private Hospitals: On March 22, for increasing the availability of healthcare facilities in the state, the government issued an order prohibiting private hospitals from performing any elective surgeries.  The hospitals were also instructed to have separate counters for respiratory infections.

Increasing the health workforce in the state: On March 30, the government issued notification for the recruitment of medical professionals on a short term basis.

Prohibition on spitting in public places: On April 6, the Department of Health, Medical and Family Welfare department banned spitting of paan, any chewable tobacco or non-tobacco product, and sputum in public places.

Welfare measures

To mitigate the hardships faced by the people, the government took various welfare measures. Some of them are summarized below:

Relief assistance: On March 23, the government announced the following measures:  

  • 12 kg of rice will be provided for free to all food security cardholders.
  • One-time support of Rs 1,500 will be provided to all food security card holding families for buying essential commodities such as groceries and vegetables.

Factories: On March 24, the government directed the management of factories to pay the wages to all workers during the lockdown period.  

Migrant Workers: On March 30, the government decided to provide 12 kg of rice or atta and one time of support of Rs 500 to all migrant workers residing in the state.

Regulation of school fees: On April 21, the government ordered all private schools not to increase any fees during the academic year of 2020-21.  The schools will charge only tuition fees on a monthly basis. 

Deferment of collection of rent: On April 23, the government notified that house owners should defer the rent collection for three months.  Further, the owners should collect the deferred amount in instalments after three months.

Administrative Measures

Deferment of salaries: The government announced 75% deferment of salaries of all the state legislators,  chairperson of all corporations and elected representatives of all local bodies.  The government employees will have salary deferment from 10% to 60%.  Employees of the  Police Department, Medical and Health Department, and sanitation workers employed in all Municipal Corporations and Municipalities are exempted from deferment of salary.

Chief Minister's Special Incentives: The government granted special incentives to certain categories of employees as follows:

  • Medical and Health Department:  The employees of the Department of Medical and Health were given an additional 10% of their gross salary as an incentive for March and April,
  • Sanitation personnel: The sanitation employees of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation were given 7,500 rupees and the sanitation personnel of other local bodies were provided 5,000 rupees as incentives for March and April,
  • Police: The police personnel were awarded an additional 10% of their gross salary as an incentive for April. 

For more information on the spread of COVID-19 and the central and state government response to the pandemic, please see here.