The court took this stand after making it clear that for now it was not going into the allegations and counter-allegations involving Verma and Asthana.
Indians see West Asia as one uninterrupted wash of Islam, but the reality is more complex. For the Druze, support from Israel—where they are a recognised minority—is now critical.
Mini deal will likely see no cut in 10% baseline tariff on Indian exports announced by Trump on 2 April, it is learnt, but additional 26% tariffs are set to be reduced.
India-Russia JV is also racing to deliver 7,000 more AK-203 assault rifles by 15 Aug. These are currently being made with 50% indigenisation and this will surge to 100% by 31 December.
Public, loud, upfront, filled with impropriety and high praise sometimes laced with insults. This is what we call Trumplomacy. But the larger objective is the same: American supremacy.
This is an important issue of law that needs to be settled. My sense, as a layperson, is that the Committee’s role is limited to ensuring an impartial selection. A fixed tenure of two years ensures continuity and a degree of independence / insulation from the political executive. However, if just cause arises – like the hypothetical question put by the Court, of someone being caught in flagrante delicto – the government has the right to act immediately against the Director. It would be then expected to inform the other two members of the Committee of its decision. Should the member(s) feel the government has not acted in good faith, they could probably make an issue of it. The CJI, donning his judicial robes, could review the decision if it is challenged before him. 2. Whatever the Court’s finding on the point of law, Director Alok Verma’s sun, sadly, is setting. If – under Justice Patnaik’s supervision – he has not been found blameless, that validates the government’s move to divest him of his powers, although it could have waited for him to change from his night suit to a business suit. Unlikely that the process could be completed before 31st January. 3. The process of selecting the next Director could be taken in hand in good time.
This is an important issue of law that needs to be settled. My sense, as a layperson, is that the Committee’s role is limited to ensuring an impartial selection. A fixed tenure of two years ensures continuity and a degree of independence / insulation from the political executive. However, if just cause arises – like the hypothetical question put by the Court, of someone being caught in flagrante delicto – the government has the right to act immediately against the Director. It would be then expected to inform the other two members of the Committee of its decision. Should the member(s) feel the government has not acted in good faith, they could probably make an issue of it. The CJI, donning his judicial robes, could review the decision if it is challenged before him. 2. Whatever the Court’s finding on the point of law, Director Alok Verma’s sun, sadly, is setting. If – under Justice Patnaik’s supervision – he has not been found blameless, that validates the government’s move to divest him of his powers, although it could have waited for him to change from his night suit to a business suit. Unlikely that the process could be completed before 31st January. 3. The process of selecting the next Director could be taken in hand in good time.