Tags: NULL THE Institute of Directors (IoD) has warned the government that plans to introduce a banking levy could drive banking business overseas.The IoD claimed the tax is a knee-jerk reaction designed to tap into anti-bank sentiment.It said that the proportionally large UK tax – £2.5bn a year compared to €1.2bn (£1bn) in Germany – risks jeopardising the UK’s position as a premier finance centre. It also criticised taxing institutions which are largely owned by the public.While the IoD says the proposed levy of £2.5bn a year by 2013 is manageable, it believes it could pave the way for further taxes to be introduced, especially if Labour are voted in at the next election.The government hopes to avoid companies simply changing their domicile by applying the levy to banks conducting business in the UK. However, the IoD warns that corporation tax revenues would be undermined if companies are forced abroad.Miles Templeman, director-general of the IoD, said: “There is clearly public concern about how some of the banks have behaved which needs to be addressed, but this should be done in a way that doesn’t encourage the banks to move their headquarters out of the UK. “There is a risk that the bank levy, as currently designed, will drive banking business away, while doing nothing to reduce the risks that banks pose to the wider economy.”The IoD also said George Osborne has a mountain to climb on tax competitiveness.It said the coalition is heading in the right direction on tax policy, but has a “very long way” to go if it wants to stem the exodus of business and attract new investment to the UK.The UK’s corporation tax rate of 28 per cent means that 18 out of 31 OECD countries have lower rates. Show Comments ▼ IoD: New tax could drive banks abroad whatsapp by Taboolaby TaboolaSponsored LinksSponsored LinksPromoted LinksPromoted LinksYou May LikeMisterStoryWoman Files For Divorce After Seeing This Photo – Can You See Why?MisterStoryTotal PastThe Ingenious Reason There Are No Mosquitoes At Disney WorldTotal PastNoteabley25 Funny Notes Written By StrangersNoteableyMoneyPailShe Was A Star, Now She Works In ScottsdaleMoneyPailDailyforestThese On-Screen Kissing Scenes Were Not Planned At AllDailyforestRecetas Get5 Common Cancer Signs to Pay Attention ToRecetas GetLearn It WiseA manada de elefantes faz isso depois que o homem salva seu bebê que está se afogandoLearn It WiseForge of Empires – Free Online GameThe Must-Play City Building Game of the Year 2021Forge of Empires – Free Online GameDrhealthPut These Foods in The Fridge if You Want Poisonous Mold on Them!Drhealth Share whatsapp Monday 4 October 2010 9:02 pm KCS-content More From Our Partners A ProPublica investigation has caused outrage in the U.S. this weekvaluewalk.comAstounding Fossil Discovery in California After Man Looks Closelygoodnewsnetwork.orgFlorida woman allegedly crashes children’s birthday party, rapes teennypost.comNative American Tribe Gets Back Sacred Island Taken 160 Years Agogoodnewsnetwork.orgKiller drone ‘hunted down a human target’ without being told tonypost.comPolice Capture Elusive Tiger Poacher After 20 Years of Pursuing the Huntergoodnewsnetwork.orgMark Eaton, former NBA All-Star, dead at 64nypost.comBrave 7-Year-old Boy Swims an Hour to Rescue His Dad and Little Sistergoodnewsnetwork.orgRussell Wilson, AOC among many voicing support for Naomi Osakacbsnews.com
Cadbury Nigeria Plc (CADBUR.ng) listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange under the Food sector has released it’s 2016 annual report.For more information about Cadbury Nigeria Plc (CADBUR.ng) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Cadbury Nigeria Plc (CADBUR.ng) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Cadbury Nigeria Plc (CADBUR.ng) 2016 annual report.Company ProfileCadbury Nigeria Plc manufactures and markets a range of chocolate malt drink mixes, sweets, powder beverages and chewing gums in Nigeria. The company was established in the 1950s to source cocoa beans from Nigeria for the Cadbury Group; it then branched into re-packing imported bulk products and grew rapidly into a fully-fledged manufacturing operation producing a range of popular Cadbury brands. Cadbury Bournvita is the company’s flagship product which is a brand of malted and chocolate malt drink mixes that has energy and nutritional properties. The company introduced other Cadbury brands into its range in the 1970s; TomTom, a large black and white sweet for soothing relief; Cadbury Buttermilk, a delicious sweet with a butter and mint flavour; Tang, a popular powdered beverage; and Clorets and Trident, brands of chewing gum. Cadbury Nigeria Plc has a 99.66% stake in Cadbury Nigeria Plc Cocoa Processing Plant which sources cocoa powder for the manufacturing of Cadbury Bournvita. Mondelez International has a majority equity-interest of 74.97% in Cadbury Nigeria Plc through its holding in Cadbury Schweppes Overseas Limited. The remaining 25.03% equity-ownership is held by a diverse group of Nigerian individuals and institutional shareholders. Cadbury Nigeria Plc’s head office is in Lagos, Nigeria. Cadbury Nigeria Plc is listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange
Alan Oscroft has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. I would like to receive emails from you about product information and offers from The Fool and its business partners. Each of these emails will provide a link to unsubscribe from future emails. More information about how The Fool collects, stores, and handles personal data is available in its Privacy Statement. Click here to claim your copy now — and we’ll tell you the name of this Top US Share… free of charge! For years now, I’ve been hearing about the great property slump that’s supposed to be just around the corner. Then there’s the Taylor Wimpey (LSE: TW) dividend. Or, rather, there isn’t. It was suspended in the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic. Put these together, and what’s the result? After starting the year well, the Taylor Wimpey share price is now down 26% since the beginning of 2020.That’s a big improvement on the situation in April, mind. At the bottom of the stock market crash, Taylor Wimpey shares had lost 48%.5G is here – and shares of this ‘sleeping giant’ could be a great way for you to potentially profit!According to one leading industry firm, the 5G boom could create a global industry worth US$12.3 TRILLION out of thin air…And if you click here we’ll show you something that could be key to unlocking 5G’s full potential…No property slump hereIs a property slump really going to happen? I’m convinced it isn’t. Well, no residential property crash. Commercial property is a different matter, and retail assets are suffering badly, Intu Properties, for example, has been struggling to collect its rents and pay its debts, and could be on the brink of collapse.So there’s been massive pressure on the Intu Properties share price, but far less on the Taylor Wimpey share price. Struggling retailers can just stop retailing and walk away, leaving commercial property owners in the soup. But people living in houses can’t do that. In the UK we’re in the grip of a chronic housing shortage too, and I don’t see a let up any time soon. Or any reasonable time beyond soon, for that matter.Long-term demandWhenever there’s an excess of demand over supply, prices tend to rise. And it might come as a surprise that it appears to be exactly what’s happening even during the Covid-19 crisis. According to Zoopla, house prices are going to keep on rising over the next three months. And that’s got to be good for the Taylor Wimpey share price.While the supply of new houses has been hampered by the lockdown, demand is building up again as the rules are being relaxed. The property experts reckon demand has risen 46% in the past few months, and predict a 2% rise in prices between now and September.Taylor Wimpey has completed a successful share placing, and it should be in good financial shape for the progressive easing of the lockdown. When the company gets back to full production, it looks like the buyers will be queueing at the door.TW share price futureI can see the Taylor Wimpey share price continuing to rise over the next few months. But I don’t expect full confidence to return until we see the shape of its long-term dividend policy. The company has been a big payer in recent years, and it’s arguable that it should have been a bit more conservative with the dividends. Had dividends been kept slightly more modest, the 2020 crunch might not have been so tough. And the new stock placing, which dilutes existing shareholders, might not have been needed.I’m hoping to see a renewed progressive dividend policy, but ideally with a little more cash kept back for better balance sheet strength. If that happens, I think the Taylor Wimpey share price could seriously pick up. Renowned stock-picker Mark Rogers and his analyst team at The Motley Fool UK have named 6 shares that they believe UK investors should consider buying NOW.So if you’re looking for more stock ideas to try and best position your portfolio today, then it might be a good day for you. Because we’re offering a full 33% off your first year of membership to our flagship share-tipping service, backed by our ‘no quibbles’ 30-day subscription fee refund guarantee. “This Stock Could Be Like Buying Amazon in 1997” Image source: Getty Images. Enter Your Email Address Our 6 ‘Best Buys Now’ Shares Alan Oscroft | Wednesday, 24th June, 2020 | More on: TW Simply click below to discover how you can take advantage of this. I’m sure you’ll agree that’s quite the statement from Motley Fool Co-Founder Tom Gardner.But since our US analyst team first recommended shares in this unique tech stock back in 2016, the value has soared.What’s more, we firmly believe there’s still plenty of upside in its future. In fact, even throughout the current coronavirus crisis, its performance has been beating Wall St expectations.And right now, we’re giving you a chance to discover exactly what has got our analysts all fired up about this niche industry phenomenon, in our FREE special report, A Top US Share From The Motley Fool. I think the Taylor Wimpey share price (TW) is too cheap to ignore now See all posts by Alan Oscroft
Can he kick it? Greig Laidlaw will need to be in top form if Scotland are to have any chance of beating New ZealandBy Katie Field, Rugby World writerSCOTLAND BEGIN their programme of EMC Internationals looking for a fourth win in succession, after a clean sweep on their summer tour of Australia, Samoa and Fiji. Their opponents are in a different position, aiming to start a new run of victories after their run of 16 consecutive wins was halted by their 18-18 draw with Australia last month. However, that’s not to say Scotland go into the match as favourites, because they are up against New Zealand, who have won the World Cup and the Rugby Championship in the past 13 months and who have never lost to Scotland.Singing the BluesScotland have played New Zealand 28 times and have managed two draws, but no wins. Since their most recent tie, 25-25 in 1983, the Scots have conceded an average of around 40 points a game to the All Blacks, and with New Zealand unquestionably the strongest side in the world at the moment, it will be the shock of the century if Andy Robinson’s side can pull off a victory this time. They have home advantage – and Murrayfield is a 67,144-sell-out in a November Test for the first time since it was redeveloped in 1994 – but last time New Zealand came to Edinburgh, two years ago, they strolled to a 49-3 triumph.Ready to go: Richie Gray passed a fitness testCh…ch…changesBoth teams have a different look to their last outings. Scotland have made five changes, with Nick De Luca and Mike Blair coming in for the injured Joe Ansbro and Chris Cusiter, Jim Hamilton returning in the second row after missing the summer tour through suspension, Geoff Cross stepping into the front row in place of Euan Murray, who will not play on Sundays, and Kelly Brown coming back into the starting line-up ahead of Richie Vernon. Richie Gray passed a midweek fitness Test to take up his place in the second row.New Zealand are fielding a new centre pairing of Ben Smith and Tamati Ellison, who coach Steve Hansen wants to try out at Test level having seen them combine well for the Highlanders. So there’s no Ma’a Nonu and Conrad Smith to contend with, but Scotland will still have to face up to Dan Carter, Richie McCall et al.Aaron Smith makes way for Piri Weepu at scrum-half and Julian Savea is named on the left wing in the place of Hosea Gear. The pack sees wholesale changes with Adam Thomson and Victor Vito coming into the back row, Luke Romano replacing Brodie Retallick at lock and Wyatt Crockett, Andrew Hore and Owen Franks forming a different front row, instead of Tony Woodcock, Keven Mealamu and Charlie Faumuina.On call: Adam Thomson in EdinburghStart Me UpIf Scotland are to have any hope of causing an upset, they have to start well. Allow the All Blacks to get onto the front foot, and that can only spell trouble. Scotland may miss Murray in the scrums, but they have terrific strength in depth in the second and back rows, as well as the dead-eye kicking of Greig Laidlaw to take any chance New Zealand offer up.Coach Andy Robinson is clear about what’s required. “We will really need to start well and keep the game simple,” he says. “New Zealand are the world champions and they perform the basic skills, well, under the highest pressure. We need to step up from the summer tour and be ready to go toe to toe in a physical contest, just as Australia did most recently against New Zealand in Brisbane.” Referee: Jerome Garces (France) NOT FOR FEATURED LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS Lest We ForgetAs the match takes place on Armistice Day, a silence in memory of the war dead will be held before the game. Scotland lost more international players in the First World War than any other nation – 30 – while New Zealand lost 20.Prediction: The raft of changes Steve Hansen has made to his New Zealand side gives Scotland a glimmer of hope, but I expect the tourists to win by a margin of 15 or 20 points.SCOTLAND v NEW ZEALAND, Sunday 11 November, 2.30pm, Murrayfield, Live on BBC1SCOTLAND: Stuart Hogg; Sean Lamont, Nick De Luca, Matt Scott, Tim Visser; Greig Laidlaw, Mike Blair; Ryan Grant, Ross Ford, Geoff Cross, Richie Gray, Jim Hamilton, Alasdair Strokosch, Ross Rennie, Kelly Brown (captain).Replacements: Scott Lawson, Allan Jacobsen, Kyle Traynor, Alastair Kellock, David Denton, Henry Pyrgos, Ruaridh Jackson, Max Evans.NEW ZEALAND: Israel Dagg; Cory Jane, Ben Smith, Tamati Ellison, Julian Savea; Daniel Carter, Piri Weepu; Wyatt Crockett, Andrew Hore, Owen Franks, Luke Romano, Sam Whitelock, Adam Thomson, Richie McCaw (captain), Victor Vito.Replacements: Dane Coles, Tony Woodcock, Ben Franks, Ali Williams, Sam Cane, Tawera Kerr-Barlow, Beauden Barrett, Ma’a Nonu.
News Pinterest 365 additional cases of Covid-19 in Republic Further drop in people receiving PUP in Donegal Twitter Pinterest WhatsApp Facebook The Mayor of Donegal Cllr. Ian McGarvey and the County Manager Seamus Neely have today signed the Donegal County Council Book of Condolence in memory of Mr. Nelson Mandela.The books of condolence will be available for signing at all Public Service Centres and at the County House in Lifford from 9am to 5.00pm Monday to Thursday and 9am to 4.30pm on Friday, except for lunchtime 12.30pm to 1pm each day.Meanwhile, a memorial night will be held in Letterkenny Cathedral on Wednesday from 530pm in honour of Nelson Mandela.One of its organisers is Nomsa Maddo. She has paid tribuite to Mr Mandela and the change he brought about in South Africa – Ms Maddo recounted one experience she had in her home country at the age of 17 when a man discovered her leaning against his car:[podcast]http://www.highlandradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/mandy530MAND.mp3[/podcast] Google+ Twitter By News Highland – December 9, 2013 WhatsApp RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Previous articleLetterkenny General recording increase in patients with vomiting bug symptomsNext articleMcGee hits out at Donegal in FRC report News Highland Google+ Man arrested on suspicion of drugs and criminal property offences in Derry Facebook Main Evening News, Sport and Obituaries Tuesday May 25th Books of Condolence in memory of Nelson Mandela open around the county 75 positive cases of Covid confirmed in North Gardai continue to investigate Kilmacrennan fire
Top Stories”Judges Not Politicians, Cannot Defend Attacks & Imputations Of Bias”: Petitioner In Plea Seeking Declaration Of No Freedom Of Speech On Hearings & Judgments Tells SC Sanya Talwar17 Aug 2020 12:43 AMShare This – xThe Supreme Court on Monday adjourned by 15 days, a plea seeking a declaration that there is no freedom of speech and expression vis-à-vis pending matters before courts of law, except to the extent of fair and true reporting.A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai & Krishna Murari heard the petitioner-Dr. Subhash Vijayran who submitted that “Judges are not Politicians &…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court on Monday adjourned by 15 days, a plea seeking a declaration that there is no freedom of speech and expression vis-à-vis pending matters before courts of law, except to the extent of fair and true reporting.A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai & Krishna Murari heard the petitioner-Dr. Subhash Vijayran who submitted that “Judges are not Politicians & cannot defend themselves against attacks of imputations against them, alleging bias”.The bench, after hearing him, thus asked Vijayran to conduct research on the law on the said issue & posted it for further consideration after 15 days.Significantly, this is the same bench which held Advocate Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt of court in the suo motu contempt case taken against him over two of his tweets about the Chief Justice of India and the Supreme Court.The Petitioner has asserted that lately, the Courts have become a “punching bag” for some Advocates who first approach the court and consume its precious time. He states that if they are not satisfied with the outcome, they approach the media and directly/ indirectly impute motives on the Judges.”Criticizing the judgments on points of law is healthy criticism – a sign of mature democracy – and helps develop the law. But criticizing the court/ judges in a way that either impute motives on the judges or project them as biased, is not healthy. The ill-effect is particularly exponential when a learned Advocate – more so one linked with a political party – does it,” the plea states.The plea is primarily focused on the recent tweets made by senior Advocate and Congress leader, P. Chidambaram, allegedly imputing motives and bias on the judges, with regard to Rajasthan political crisis, pending adjudication before the HC as well as the SC.The Petitioner states that the “innocuous tweets” impute that the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court hearing the matter are “puppets” of the present Government at the Centre and pass orders that please the Central Government.Taking exception to such public remarks the plea states,”If anyone has any grievance, he has the right to move the courts through appropriate proceedings. Ranting out in the media and imputing motives/bias on the judges is neither good for the system nor is the solution to the grievances of the aggrieved.”Such actions, the Petitioner states, bring disrepute to the judiciary, and shake people’s confidence in the system.The petitioner has sought following declarations from Supreme Court;* Declaring that there is no freedom of speech and expression vis-à-vis pending matters before courts of law, except to the extent of fair and true reporting of court’s proceedings in a manner that does not directly or indirectly impute motives/ bias to the judges/court. * Declaring that there is no freedom of speech and expression vis-à-vis final judgments, orders or decrees of courts of law, except to the extent of fair and true reporting of court’s proceedings, and healthy criticism of the law applied by the courts in a manner that does not directly or indirectly impute motives/ bias to the judges/court. Next Story
Top StoriesState Govt/SDMA Can Override UGC Deadline For Exam Based On Local Pandemic Situation: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK28 Aug 2020 4:46 AMShare This – x””No State shall permit health of its subject to be compromised”In its judgment delivered on Friday, the Supreme Court observed that the State Disaster Management Authority and State Government has authority under Disaster Management Act, 2005, to take a decision that for mitigation or prevention of disaster it is not possible to hold physical examination in the State.”The direction of the University Grants Commission in Revised Guidelines…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginIn its judgment delivered on Friday, the Supreme Court observed that the State Disaster Management Authority and State Government has authority under Disaster Management Act, 2005, to take a decision that for mitigation or prevention of disaster it is not possible to hold physical examination in the State.”The direction of the University Grants Commission in Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 insofar as it directs the Universities and Colleges to complete the final year/terminal year examination by 30.09.2020 shall be overridden by any contrary decision taken by the State Disaster Management Authority or the State Government exercising power under the Disaster Management Act, 2005.” the bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and MR Shah held.The court observed that, with regard to conduct of examinations, the State authorities are competent to assess the situation in a particular State regarding possibility of holding of examinations. The bench was considering the submission that the UGC guidelines does not prohibit a State or State Disaster Management Authority in taking appropriate decision in exercise of power under Disaster Management Act, 2005 not to hold examination looking to the situation in a particular State. The Court said the guidelines dated 06.07.2020 of the UGC insofar as it directs completion of final examinations by 30.09.2020 which direction is overridden by the decision of the State Disaster Management Authority and State Government where it resolved not to hold the examinations. The bench observed:”No State shall permit health of its subject to be compromised that is why overriding power has been given to the State Disaster Management Authority and the State Government with regard to any inconsistency with any other law for the time being in force. We have noticed above that there are no orders or directions in the guidelines of the National Disaster Management Authority or National Executive Committee fettering the powers of the State Disaster Management Authority and a State Government to take a decision as to whether examinations by physical mode be permitted in particular State looking to the situation in the State.”The court recorded the UGC counsel’s submission that it shall be ready to consider any request received from any State to allow the Universities to reschedule the date of final examinations and in the event any request is made to 144 the UGC the deadline for completion of the examination can be extended by the UGC and the date of final examinations can be rescheduled. The Court has grant liberty to State/Union Territory to make an application to the University Grants Commission for extending deadline of 30.09.2020 if, in exercise of jurisdiction under Disaster Management Act, 2005, it has taken a decision that it is not possible to conduct the final year/terminal semester examination by 30.09.2020.Referring to the Section 72 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 empowers the State Disaster Management Authority as well as the State Government to take decision for prevention and mitigation of a disaster and the action taken by the authorities under the Disaster Management Act have been given overriding effect to achieve the purpose and object of the Act. “In case of a disaster the priority of all authorities under the Disaster Management Act is to immediately combat the disaster and contain it to save human life. Saving of life of human being is given paramount importance and the Act, 2005 gives primacy, priority to the actions and measures taken under the Act over inconsistency in any other law for the time being in force. Section 72 begins with non obstante clause.”, the bench observed.State Govt./SDMA Cannot Promote The Students Without Holding Final Year/Terminal Semester Examinations State Governments or State Disaster Management Authority in exercise of power under Disaster Management Act, 2005 has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the students of final year/terminal students should be promoted on the basis of earlier year assessment and internal assessment.The Court said that University Grants Commission is the Authority to issue guidelines for determination and maintenance of standards of education and teaching of the Universities. The bench observed thus while considering the issue whether the State and State’s Disaster Management Authority in exercise of jurisdiction under Disaster Management Act, 2005 can take a decision not to hold examination by 30.09.2020 disregarding the direction in the UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020? This issue arose since the State Disaster Management Authority (State of Maharashtra) had resolved to promote the students without taking the final examinations. It was contended before the Court that the decision of the Disaster Management Authority or the State Government that students should be promoted without appearing in the final year/terminal semester examination, is not within the domain of the Disaster Management Act, 2005Agreeing with the said view, the bench observed:The decision to promote students and grant Degree by a State if contrary to any Central enactment or guidelines issued thereunder the Central enactment and the guidelines thereunder shall have precedence by virtue of the same being referable to Entry 66 List I. We, thus, conclude that the State Disaster Management Authority and the State Government has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the students of final year/terminal examination should be promoted on the basis of earlier years assessment and internal assessment whereas the UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020 directed specifically to conduct final year/terminal semester examination.The court also noted that the UGC guideline shall override the decision of the State Government and the State Disaster Management Authority regarding promoting the students, does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and shall have no protection of Section 72 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.We, thus, conclude that the State or the State Disaster Management Authority have no jurisdiction under Disaster Management Act, 2005 to take a decision for promoting the students on the basis of previous performance or internal assessment which decision being contrary to revised guidelines of the University Grants Commission cannot be upheld and has to give way to the guidelines of UGC which is the Authority to issue guidelines for determination and maintenance of standards of education and teaching of the Universities.The bench also observed that the direction of the University Grants Commission in its revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 insofar it directs the Universities and colleges to complete the final year/terminal examinations by 30.09.2020 shall be overridden by any contrary decision taken by a State Disaster Management Authority or the State Government exercising power under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The Court has grant liberty to State/Union Territory to make an application to the University Grants Commission for extending deadline of 30.09.2020 if, in exercise of jurisdiction under Disaster Management Act, 2005, it has taken a decision that it is not possible to conduct the final year/terminal semester examination by 30.09.2020.The following is the conclusions arrived at by the court after examining various issues involved in the case:The Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 issued by the UGC [whereby all the Universities and Colleges across the country had been directed to conduct terminal semester/ final year examinations by 30.09.2020] are not beyond the domain of the UGC and they relate to coordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher education.The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are in continuation to the earlier Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 and are not contrary to the earlier Guidelines. We have to look into the substance of the Guidelines to find out the intention and object of the Guidelines. The Guidelines were issued with the object that a uniform academic calendar be followed by all the Universities and final /terminal examinations be held.Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to be treated to have been issued in exercise of the statutory powers vested in the Commission under Section 12. As per the Statutory Regulations, 2003, it is the 154 statutory duty of the Universities to adopt the Guidelines issued by the UGC. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 cannot be ignored by terming it as non-statutory or advisory. The differentiation made in the Revised Guidelines to hold final or terminal semester examination and to give option for earlier years/intermediate semester for not holding the examination has a rational basis. The differentiation has nexus with the object to be achieved. We, thus, reject the challenge to the revised Guidelines on the ground that there is any discrimination between the students of final year/terminal semester and those of intermediate and first year.The revised Guidelines also cannot be termed to violate Article 14 of the Constitution on the ground that one date, i.e., 30.09.2020 has been fixed irrespective of the conditions prevailing in individual States. The date for completion of examination was fixed throughout the country to maintain uniformity in the academic calendar.The Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 as well as Standard Operating Procedures for conduct of examinations circulated vide letter dated 08.07.2020 of UGC as well as O.M. dated 06.07.2020 issued by MHRD clearly shows deep concern with the health of all stakeholders, i.e., students as well as the exam functionaries. Challenge to the Guidelines on the ground of it being violative of Article 21 is repelled.The expression “other bodies” used in opening part of the Section 12 of the UGC Act, 1956 is in reference to other bodies apart from Universities as enumerated under Section 12. The submission that other bodies as occurring in Section 12 should include State Disaster Management Authority or health experts is misconceived. Section 12 never contemplated any such expression. The revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are not in breach of Section 12 of 1956 Act.The direction of the University Grants Commission in Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 insofar as it directs the Universities and Colleges to complete the final year/terminal year examination by 30.09.2020 shall be overridden by any contrary decision taken by the State Disaster Management Authority or the State Government exercising power under the Disaster Management Act, 2005.The State Governments or State Disaster Management Authority in exercise of power under Disaster Management Act, 2005 has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the students of final year/terminal students should be promoted on the basis of earlier year assessment and internal assessment, which decision being contrary to UGC Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to give way to the UGC Guidelines. The UGC Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 specifically directed to conduct the final year/ terminal semester examination which shall override such contrary decision of the State Government or SDMA.The State Governments or State Disaster Management Authority in exercise of power under Disaster Management Act, 2005 has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the students of final year/terminal students should be promoted on the basis of earlier year assessment and internal assessment, which decision being contrary to UGC Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to give way to the UGC Guidelines. The UGC Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 specifically directed to conduct the final year/ terminal semester examination which shall override such contrary decision of the State Government or SDMA.Click Here To Download Judgment[Read Judgment] Subscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story
Antioxidant enzymes, total glutathione (GSH), and ascorbic acid (ASA) were determined in whole body homogenates of nondiapausing larvae, diapausing larvae during the diapausing period (October, December, and February), and in pupae emerged from both diapausing and nondiapausing larvae of the European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis, Hubn., Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). The activities of catalase, selenium nondependent glutathione peroxidase (GPx), and glutathione-S-transferase (GST), as well as the content of GSH and ASA, were found to vary throughout the larval diapause. Compared to diapausing larvae, nondiapausing larvae were higher in levels of catalose, GPx, GST, and dehydroascorbate reductase (DHAR) activity. GSH content was also increased. However, nondiapausing larvae contained less ASA than diapausing ones. Pupae had higher GPx and GST activity and an increased ASA content compared to larvae. The pupae emerged from nondiapausing larvae had higher GST, glutathione reductase (GR), and DHAR activities, but lower GPx activity and ASA content than those emerged from diapausing larvae. Correlation analysis revealed differences in the way the antioxidant level is equilibrated for a particular stage and developmental pattern. The results suggest that cellular antioxidants are involved in both the protection of cells and the regulation of redox levels during the pre-adult stages of Ostrinia nubilalis.
AHCA LetterFacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmail