Spread over 395 articles in 22 parts and eight schedules at the time of its formation, the original Indian Constitution mentioned “land” in only four parts.
Unlike his colleagues from the time of the BJS, several of whom became governors and held other constitutional posts, Malhotra chose to lead a quiet and simple retired life after the massive 2014 victory of the BJP.
SEBI probe concluded that purported loans and fund transfers were paid back in full and did not amount to deceptive market practices or unreported related party transactions.
Since 1815, Nepali Gorkhas have served in Indian & British Armies, as well as in Bihar, Bengal & Assam Police. Since Agnipath scheme came in, no Nepal-domiciled Gorkha has enlisted.
What Munir has achieved with Trump is a return to normal, ironing out the post-Abbottabad crease. The White House picture gives us insight into how Pakistan survives, occasionally thrives and thinks.
Do not think the Indian lawmakers are stupid. They are dominated by the rich farmers the jamindars of the old days who have been buying the top most legal brains willing to sell their soles. Over 70 years the the land and the benefits accruing from land by way of agricultural produce and the capital gains out of increasing prices naturally and by manipulation were kept out of taxes in the name of poor and small land holders. Sections of the society were deprived of entitlement to purchase land in some of the most lucrative areas. Given the speed of justice more complicated and contradictory laws only help them buy time .
Nothing is flawed every thing by design.
India must follow the Chinese principle of Land Rights and management where all land essentially belongs to the Society first and Individual second.
Land must be collectivised and pooled for meeting various need such as industrialization and urbanization. The state must become the defacto owner of Land and land resources and must judiciously utilize for the best intreint of the Society at Large instead of a particular community or section of society.
That’s selfish as well as short sighted.
You don’t belong to an agricultural family or a disadvantaged section. Hence, you want land to be “collectivised and pooled” for industrialisation and urbanisation.
Secondly, don’t equate ruling party’s philosophy to society’s interests.
Going by this, reliance might end up owning the entire forest resources of India and tribals would be asked to live lives at the terms of others (Anyway, going by your reasoning, I feel you don’t believe allowing tribals to live their lives in their preferred way.)
If you give rights to different groups, things fall in place.
Chinese system looks adventurous and enterprising if we don’t go past the flowery language.
Do not think the Indian lawmakers are stupid. They are dominated by the rich farmers the jamindars of the old days who have been buying the top most legal brains willing to sell their soles. Over 70 years the the land and the benefits accruing from land by way of agricultural produce and the capital gains out of increasing prices naturally and by manipulation were kept out of taxes in the name of poor and small land holders. Sections of the society were deprived of entitlement to purchase land in some of the most lucrative areas. Given the speed of justice more complicated and contradictory laws only help them buy time .
Nothing is flawed every thing by design.
India must follow the Chinese principle of Land Rights and management where all land essentially belongs to the Society first and Individual second.
Land must be collectivised and pooled for meeting various need such as industrialization and urbanization. The state must become the defacto owner of Land and land resources and must judiciously utilize for the best intreint of the Society at Large instead of a particular community or section of society.
That’s selfish as well as short sighted.
You don’t belong to an agricultural family or a disadvantaged section. Hence, you want land to be “collectivised and pooled” for industrialisation and urbanisation.
Secondly, don’t equate ruling party’s philosophy to society’s interests.
Going by this, reliance might end up owning the entire forest resources of India and tribals would be asked to live lives at the terms of others (Anyway, going by your reasoning, I feel you don’t believe allowing tribals to live their lives in their preferred way.)
If you give rights to different groups, things fall in place.
Chinese system looks adventurous and enterprising if we don’t go past the flowery language.