text:
While there is no tax on printed school books, there is tax on their printing and supply - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
July 11, 2022
A post is being widely shared on social media claiming that central government imposes tax on school books. Let us fact-check the claim made in the post.
Claim: Central government imposes tax on school books.
Fact: While there is no exact mention of GST on school books or school textbooks, GST on ‘Printed books, including Braille books’; and on ‘Children’s picture, drawing or colouring books’ is zero, whereas the GST on ‘Exercise book, graph book, & laboratory note book and notebooks’ is 12%. The Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) held that 12% of GST is applicable to printing and supply of textbooks to government departments which are registered under Goods and Services Tax (GST) Acts, 2017.
While there is no exact mention of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on schoolbooks or school textbooks, GST on ‘Printed books, including Braille books’ (tariff item 4901); and on ‘Children’s picture, drawing or colouring books’ (tariff item 4903) is zero.
Whereas the GST on ‘Exercise book, graph book, & laboratory notebook and notebooks’ (tariff item 4820) is 12%.
In general, books are exempted under GST, but the inputs such as printing, binding, and royalties to authors attract tax at 12% (rates vary according to rates of corresponding goods). Also, no input tax credit is available to publishers which many feared could lead to increased prices.
According to this article, “the Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) held that 12% of Goods and Service Tax (GST) is applicable to printing and supply of textbooks to government departments which are registered under Goods and Services Tax (GST) Acts, 2017.” However, the GST is exempted if the departments are not registered under the GST Act.
In 2020, when the same claim was viral on social media, PIB Fact Check through its Twitter account had affirmed that this claim was fake. It even said, “There is no tax on school textbooks.”
दावा: सोशल मीडिया पर यह दावा किया जा रहा कि केंद्र सरकार ने स्कूली किताबों पर टैक्स लगा दिया है। #PIBFactCheck: यह दावा फर्जी है। स्कूली टेक्स्ट बुक्स पर कोई टैक्स नहीं है। pic.twitter.com/OsvfgYMOgC
To sum it up, while there is no tax on printed school books, there is tax on its printing and supply.
Update (11 JULY 2022):
It is also being falsely shared on social media that India is the first and the last country to impose such a tax on school books. It has been already debunked above that there is no GST on printed books in India (only inputs such as printing, binding, and royalties to authors attract tax). While there is no GST on printed books in India, many other countries impose taxes on printed books. More details regarding those countries can be found on the website of ‘International Publishers Association’.


text:
White House Twitter Handle Temporarily Followed PM Modi and Indian Officials During Trump's 2020 Visit, Later Unfollowed - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 3, 2023
A video circulating on social media claims that the official White House Twitter account follows only 19 users, with 15 of them being American government officials and politicians. The remaining four, according to the claim, are official accounts of Indian Prime Minister Modi, the Indian President, an Indian Embassy official, etc. Let’s verify the claim made in the post.
Claim: Apart from American officials and politicians, the official White House Twitter account follows only Indian Prime Minister Modi, the Indian President, and an Indian Embassy official.
Fact: Currently, the official White House Twitter account does not follow any Indian official. Nevertheless, it did briefly follow PM Modi and other Indian officials during Trump’s 2020 visit to India to facilitate the retweeting of their messages in support of the trip. The account’s following list changes in response to events and diplomatic engagements. Hence the claim made in the post is MISLEADING.
Upon examining the official White House Twitter account, we discovered that at the time of writing this article, it follows a mere 6 accounts. These include the President of the United States, the First Lady, the Vice President, the Second Gentleman, the White House COVID-19 Response Team, and the White House’s Spanish-language Twitter account. Contrary to the claim, the White House Twitter account is not following the Indian Prime Minister or any other Indian officials.
Nevertheless, Indian media reports from April 2020, when President Trump was in office, reveal that the former official White House Twitter account (@WhiteHouse45) followed the Indian President, Indian Prime Minister, and Indian Embassy handles during that period. However, by the end of April 2020, the White House account had unfollowed these Indian accounts.
Amid speculation about why the White House made such a decision, the administration explained that its Twitter handle typically follows accounts of officials from host countries on a temporary basis during presidential visits. This practice is intended to facilitate the retweeting of their messages in support of the trip. For instance, when President Donald Trump visited India in the last week of February 2020, the official White House Twitter account started following the accounts of President Ram Nath Kovind, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and other Indian officials. Although Twitter does not permit general users to view past following connections, we observed a change in the number of accounts followed by the White House, as well as retweets and mentions in posts during Presidential visits. This suggests that the White House handle’s following list changes according to events and diplomatic engagements.
To sum it up, the White House’s official Twitter account briefly followed PM Modi and other Indian officials during Trump’s visit to India in 2020 to streamline the retweeting of their messages in support of the trip. The account’s following list adapts according to events and diplomatic engagements.

source: news-factly

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Who can seek Maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 20, 2016
Legislated as a tool for social justice, Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 provides an effective remedy for neglected persons to seek maintenance. But, who all can seek maintenance?
Legislated as a tool for social justice, Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 provides an effective remedy for neglected persons to seek maintenance. A follower of any religion can apply for maintenance under Section 125 without restriction.
Who Can Claim Maintenance?
Some of the laws applicable to the matters of maintenance to wives, parents, sons, daughters and other dependents and the Acts covered within the jurisdiction of the Family Courts are the following.
Under Section 125, any of the following persons can claim maintenance.
A woman is considered as the “wife” only if her marriage to the man is legally valid.
For Hindus, a legally valid marriage requires that:
For Hindus, the second wife cannot claim maintenance because a second marriage is forbidden by law and is not recognised as being valid. The second wife is entitled to claim maintenance only if the husband concealed his first marriage from her.
For Muslims, a legally valid marriage requires that:
Live-in relationships are presumed to be a marriage. The wife who lives separately without sufficient reasons or due to personal mutual agreement cannot claim maintenance. “Wife” includes a divorced woman, but she must not be remarried on the date that she files an application for maintenance. A divorced Muslim wife can claim maintenance even if the iddat period has passed, but she must not be remarried. The age of the wife is irrelevant in claims of maintenance – she may be a minor or a major. Additionally, the wife must not be living in adultery.
Male and female children, irrespective of whether they are born inside or outside the legally valid marriage of the father and mother, can claim maintenance. They must be minors to claim maintenance. They may be married or unmarried.
Adult children can claim maintenance from their parents only if they have a physical or mental abnormality that makes them unable to maintain themselves. An adult unmarried daughter can claim maintenance from her parents.
Married minor girls can claim maintenance from their parents till they turn 18 if their husbands do not have sufficient means to maintain them. However, married adult girls cannot claim maintenance from the parents.
Both the mother and the father, whether natural or adoptive, can claim maintenance from any one or more of their children. Daughters are also liable to pay maintenance to the mother and the father. A step-mother can claim maintenance only if she is a widow and does not have natural-born sons or daughters.
Conditions for Granting Maintenance:
Person from whom maintenance is claimed must have the ability to pay maintenance. Ability means being employed, owning land, having a source of income or having a healthy body capable of work.
What is the Amount of Maintenance that can be given?
Maintenance orders under Section 125 can be heard only by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class. She can order a monthly allowance of maintenance that she deems just and fair. This is usually decided after considering the income of the person, the standard of living that is consistent with the status of the claimant and the separate earnings, if any, of the claimant. The maintenance must aid in ensuring the same standard of living for the claimant. It must neither be so plentiful that it tempts the claimant to rely solely on maintenance nor so pitiful that it pushes the claimant into vagrancy or a lower standard of living.
Maintenance is payable either from the date of order of payment or from the date of application for maintenance, depending on the court’s judgment of the cooperation and decent behaviour demonstrated by the parties.
A second application of maintenance is allowed under Section 125 and the quantum of maintenance can be enhanced with passage of time or change in material circumstances and prices.
Where Can Maintenance Proceedings be Filed?
A wife can file maintenance proceedings in any place where :
Parents can file maintenance proceedings in any place where :
Enforcement of Maintenance Order
After a maintenance order is passed, a copy of the order must be supplied to the claimant free of cost. The person who is ordered to pay maintenance must obey the court order. The failure to pay maintenance without sufficient reason will result in a court warrant for collecting the amount due. The court warrant can attach any immovable property or salary of the person. If the person does not pay maintenance even after the warrant is executed, the person is liable to imprisonment for a maximum of 1 month or until the amount is paid, whichever is earlier. The application for enforcement of maintenance must be filed within 1 year from the date on which it became due. Otherwise the application will be dismissed.
453 Family Courts currently functional
As per government data, a total of 453 family courts are functional in the country as on August 2016. Thousands of cases are pending in these courts. More than 2.5 lakh cases are pending in Uttar Pradesh, more than 50000 in Bihar & Kerala.
Featured Image: Image

created: December 20, 2016


text:
Who decides the Auto & Taxi Fares? - Factly
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
June 16, 2015
Greater citizen engagement in governance is possible only when a large section of the common public is aware of the basic government laws & rules. Unfortunately, because of their complexity, these laws & rules do not appeal to the common man. At Factly, we are trying to simplify these laws/rules and present some of the important sections of these laws that are relevant to the common man on a daily basis.
Often times, common people do not know/understand government laws & rules. There could be multiple reasons for this lack of awareness, like complexity of rules etc. At Factly, we are trying to unravel complex laws and present them in a manner that a common man can easily understand.  In this piece, we look at laws governing Auto & Taxi fares and who decides these fares.
How are Auto Rickshaws & Taxis classified?
Auto Rickshaws & Taxis are governed by the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 (MV Act). This act might soon be replaced by a new ‘Road Transport & Safety Act’. But till then, it is the MV act that we need to be aware of.
Every owner whose vehicle is used as a ‘transport vehicle’ (passengers or goods) should obtain a permit from the Regional or State Transport Authority as per Sec 66 of the MV Act. In case a permit is not obtained and the vehicle is used as a transport vehicle, then both the owner and the driver could be punished under Section 192A of the MV Act. If there is a fleet of vehicles like Radio Cabs, Meru etc, they also have to obtain a permit.
The State Governments are given powers under Section 67 of the MV Act to control road transport and hence these ‘transport vehicles’ also controlled by the respective state government. This power is granted to the state governments for a variety of reasons like co-ordinating rail & road transport, prevent deterioration of the road system and also prevent uneconomic competition among permit holders of transport vehicles.
Who then decides the fares?
Under Section 67(1)(d)(i) of the MV Act, the State governments from time to time may issue directions to the State Transport Authority & the Regional Transport Authority (RTA) regarding fares & freights. The government through an order has to define maximum fare, minimum etc. The ‘transport vehicles’ with permits from the state government are classified as stage carriers, contract carriers and goods carriages based on their mode of use.
The state governments from time to time revise fares based on various factors such as inflation, fuel price, demands from various quarters etc. The government notifies different fares for different types of vehicles like Auto Rickshaws, Taxis, Radio Cabs etc. For example, here is a snapshot of the notification issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in 2014 revising Auto Rickshaw fares. All State Governments follow a similar procedure.
What about overcharging & refusing to carry passengers?
Section 84(c) of the MV Act requires the permit holders to charge fares as fixed by the State Governments. If the permit holder breaches this condition or for that matter any of the conditions in Section 84 of the MV Act, their permit can be cancelled or suspended by the RTA. You could make a complaint to the relevant RTA if you find anyone overcharging.
Lot of passengers complain that Auto Rickshaw & Taxi Drivers refuse to carry passengers. This is also a violation of the MV Act. Section 74(2)(xii) of the act says that except in circumstances of exceptional nature, the owner/driver shall not refuse to carry passengers. Though exceptional nature has not been expressly defined in the act, one can approach the RTA if any Auto Rickshaw or a Taxi refuses to carry.
What about Uber, Ola etc?
Unfortunately, the MV Act 1988 does not define intermediaries like Uber, Ola who are only aggregators, in the sense that they do not own any vehicle but only provide a platform for drivers. Hence various state governments could not take any action on them under MV Act, rather they blocked these websites using the provisions of the IT act.  The new road transport & safety bill draft does define these ‘digital intermediaries’


text:
WHO did not issue any advisory to Government of India on the issue of milk adulteration - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 14, 2023
A screenshot of a news paper clipping is being shared on social media claiming that the World Health Organization (WHO) has issued an advisory to the Government of India stating that 87% population of India will suffer from cancer by 2025 because of consuming adulterated milk. According to the post, WHO has stated that India produces only 14 crore litres of milk every day but consumes 64 crore litres of adulterated milk every day. The post claims that the Animal Welfare Board members have intimated government that 68.7 per cent of milk or milk products sold in the country are not as per the standards laid down by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). Let’s verify the claim made in the post.
Claim: WHO issued an advisory to the Government of India stating that 87% population of the country will suffer from cancer by 2025 because of the consumption of adulterated milk.
Fact: WHO did not issue any such advisory to the Indian Government over the issue of adulteration of milk or milk products. WHO and the Government of India have issued clarifications about this false news being shared on the internet. According to the Economic Survey 2021-22, the per day average milk production in India was 50.58 crore litres in the fiscal year 2020-21. Hence, the claim made in the post is False.
When we searched to check whether WHO had issued any such advisory note to the Indian government about 87% population might suffer from cancer because of consuming adulterated milk in the country, we found a press note issued by WHO regarding this viral news reported by a section of media. WHO in the press note stated, “Contrary to reports in a section of media, WHO would like to state that it has not issued any advisory to the Government of India on the issue of adulteration of milk/milk products.”
The Press Information Bureau (PIB) through a tweet clarified that WHO had not issued any such advisory to the Government of India. On 22 November 2019, while answering a parliament member’s question about the rumours of WHO issuing an advisory to the government over 87% population going to suffer from cancer because of consuming adulterated milk, Dr. Harsh Vardhan, the then Minister of Family and Health Welfare, stated that no such advisory was issued by WHO to the Government of India on milk adulteration.
Responding to the another question on 68.7 per cent of milk and milk products being sold in the country are not as per the standards laid down by the FSSAI, Harsh Vardhan stated, “The Nationwide Milk Safety and Quality Survey conducted by Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) in 2018 revealed that only 7% (456 out of total 6,432 samples) had contaminants (antibiotics, pesticides and aflatoxin M1) that make milk unsafe for consumption. Further, only 12 out of a total of 6,432 samples had adulterants that affect the safety of milk. These 12 samples include 6 samples adulterated with hydrogen peroxide, 3 samples adulterated with detergents, 2 samples adulterated with urea and one sample was found to have neutralizer.”
Milk production and consumption in India:
According to the Economic Survey 2021-22, the total milk production in the country for the fiscal year 2021-22 was 209.96 million tonnes. When the value is converted into litres, it is found that a total of 18,460.67 crore litres of milk was produced in the country in 2021-22. So, on average, 50.58 crore litres of milk was produced every day in the fiscal year 2020-21.
The milk consumption in the country is calculated on the basis of the per capita availability of milk. As per the Economic Survey 2021-22 annual report, the per capita availability of milk for the fiscal year 2021-22 was 427 grams. According to the National Statistical Office’s (NSO) household consumer expenditure (HCE) survey for 2011-12, the monthly per capita consumption of milk was 4.33 litres in rural India and 5.42 litres in urban India. Factly published a detailed article on the milk production and consumption statistics of India.
To sum it up, WHO did not issue any advisory to the Government of India on the issue of adulteration of milk or milk products.

created: February 14, 2023


text:
WHO did not list out these 7 brain-damaging habits - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 23, 2020
A post accompanying an image enumerates the 7 biggest brain-damaging habits according to WHO is doing rounds on social media. Through this article let’s fact-check the claim made in the post.
List of 7 biggest brain-damaging habits by WHO.
Fact: When the same claim went viral in Nigeria, WHO clarified that this message has not originated from their side. While these seven habits do not directly lead to brain damage, they can lead to negative and life-threatening effects only when done in excess. Hence the claim made in the post is FALSE.
When the same claim went viral in Nigeria, ICIR debunked the claim by reaching out to WHO officials to which they clarified that this message has not originated from their side. With this, we can say that this list is not released by WHO. Further, let’s look at each of these seven habits.
Claim 1: Missing Breakfast
As per the studies published on National Institute of Health (NIH), there is no direct correlation between missing breakfast and brain damage, though missing breakfast may lead to up-regulation of appetite which in turn may lead to weight gain over time and deleterious changes in risk factors for diabetes and cardiovascular disease. These findings can be read here and here.
Claim 2: Sleeping Late
As per a blog by Harvard Medical School which quoted the findings of the study, both too much and too little aren’t good as they may lead to memory issues. On average, seven hours of sleep helps maintain memory. Also, the blog quotes a previous study which links poor sleep with higher risks of heart disease and stroke, type 2 diabetes, and depression.
Claim 3: High Sugar Consumption
As per WHO recommendations, we require 25 grams of sugar per day in our diet. Studies have listed how too much sugar leads to decreased cognitive function, anxiety and even resistance to insulin.
Claim 4: More sleeping specially at morning
There is no direct relation between sleeping in the morning and brain damage. However daytime sleeping eventually leads to lack of proper sleep in the night. When one does not sleep at night, they deprive the body and the brain of its natural healing and recovery processes. This will further lead to irregular sleeping patterns which mess up the body’s sleep cycle. According to a study, power naps of 10-15 minutes have proven to boost an individual’s productivity and mood.
Claim 5: Eating meal while watching TV or computer
According to a report by Harvard Medical School, distracted eating can lead to eating more than required and the food is not savoured while eating though no relation was found between cognitive function and distracted eating.
Claim 6: Wearing a cap or socks while sleeping
Generally, people in cold countries sleep with socks on. According to a study, feet warming using bed socks during the sleep period improved sleep quality by accelerating sleep initiation and maintaining the relaxation of the body while sleeping. This has proved beneficial in cooler countries. However, in a tropical country like India, sleeping with socks on will lead to an increase in body temperature and thereby increased sweating. Although there is no research to show sleeping with socks on leads to cognitive decay.
Claim 7: Habit of blocking urine
There is no research to show blocking urine leads to cognitive decay. But according to doctors, holding urine for too long can weaken the bladder muscles over time. “Holding urine for extremely long periods of time can also cause urinary tract infections due to bacteria build-up. In addition, it can increase the risk of kidney disease and in rare cases even risk your bladder bursting, a condition that can be deadly”.
To sum it up, while the above seven habits do not directly lead to brain damage, they can lead to negative and life-threatening effects only when done in excess.

created: September 23, 2020


text:
WHO has not accepted any Indian student’s home remedy for COVID-19 cure - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
July 14, 2020
A message is doing the rounds on social media claiming that the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted an Indian student’s home remedy for the cure of COVID-19. In the message, it is mentioned that the home remedy was prepared by a student of Pondicherry University and he has prepared it by mixing 1 tablespoon of black pepper powder, 2 tablespoons of honey and some ginger juice. It is mentioned that if the mixture is consumed consecutively for five days, the effects of Coronavirus would be suppressed. Let’s fact-check the claim made in the post.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted an Indian student’s home remedy for the cure of COVID-19.
Fact: There is no authentic information that an Indian student from Pondicherry University has found a cure for COVID-19. WHO website clearly states that, to date, there are no medicines that can prevent or treat COVID-19. Hence the claim made in the post is FALSE.
When we searched to check if any Indian student from Pondicherry University has found a cure for COVID-19, no news reports confirming the same were found. Regarding the cure mentioned in the post, many news reports mentioned that the mixture (honey + black pepper powder + ginger juice) is a good remedy for cold and cough and also boosts immunity. Those reports can be seen here, here and here. But none of these reports claim this to be a cure for COVID-19.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has debunked myths that are being spread around the coronavirus disease. One of the myths debunked also states that including Hot peppers (one of the ingredients mentioned in the post) in the food cannot cure or prevent COVID-19.
In the same Mythbusters section on the WHO website, it can read that, to date,  there are no medicines that can prevent or treat COVID-19.
To sum it up,  WHO has not accepted any Indian student’s home remedy for COVID-19 cure.


text:
WHO has not approved any breathing exercise to diagnose the COVID-19 virus - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 29, 2021
A 30-second breathing exercise video is being shared on social media claiming it as the self-diagnostic technique to detect the COVID-19 virus in the body. This video shows a point moving towards the marks ‘A’ and ‘B’. This post claims that if a person can hold his breath while the point reaches from A to B, it can be concluded that the person is not infected by the COVID-19 virus. Let’s verify the claim made in the post.
Claim: 30-second breathing exercise can detect the COVID-19 virus in the body.
Fact: WHO has only approved PCR, Rapid antigen, and Antibody tests to detect the COVID-19 virus in the person. Earlier, when a similar 10-second breathing exercise video shared as the self-diagnostic technique to find the COVID-19 virus, WHO and PIB categorically stated this news as false. Hence, the claim made in the post is FALSE.
When we searched to check if any such self-diagnostic technique exists to detect if one is infected with the COVID-19 virus,  it is found out that World Health Organization (WHO) has approved only three tests to diagnose the COVID-19 virus – PCR, Rapid Antigen, Antibody tests.
As of now, these three are the only approved tests to diagnose the COVID-19 virus in the body. Earlier, when a similar 10-second breathing exercise video shared as the self-diagnostic technique to find the COVID-19 virus, WHO has clarified that they did not approve any breathing exercise to detect the COVID-19 virus. WHO stated that being able to hold breath for 10 seconds or more without coughing or feeling discomfort DOES NOT mean the person is free from the coronavirus (COVID-19) or any other lung disease.
When a similar 10-second breathing video shared as the COVID-19 diagnostic technique in India, PIB through a tweet stated the news as false.
Claim: If you can hold your breath for 10 sec without discomfort, you don’t have #Coronavirus#PIBFactCheck : Most young patients with #Coronavirus will be able to hold their breaths for more the 10 sec and many elderly won't be able to do the same.
Conclusion: #FakeNews pic.twitter.com/GXCX2Rujwb
Faheem Younus, the Chief of Infectious Diseases at the University of Maryland, clarified that most young patients infected with the COVID-19 virus were able to hold their breaths for much longer than 10 seconds. He emphasised that most percentage of the elder people could not hold their breath for 10-seconds, even when they are not affected by the COVID-19 virus.
Myth #3: If you can hold your breath for ten seconds without discomfort, you don’t have COVID.
Wrong: Most young patients with Coronavirus will be able to hold their breaths for much longer than 10 seconds. And many elderly without the virus won’t be able to do it.
To sum it up, the World Health Organization (WHO) has not approved any breathing exercise to diagnose the COVID-19 virus.


text:
WHO has not approved any home remedy by an Indian student to cure COVID-19 - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 22, 2021
A message is being circulated on social media claiming that an ex-student of St. Xavier’s High School in Mumbai recently found a home remedy to cure the COVID-19. This post claims that this is the first home remedy that is approved by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the message, this home remedy was prepared using a mixture of one teaspoon of pepper powder, two teaspoons of honey, and a little ginger juice. The post also states that this mixture can suppress the COVID-19 to 100% if it is consumed for five consecutive days. Let’s verify the claim made in the post.
Claim: WHO approved a home remedy found by an ex-student of St. Xavier’s High School in Mumbai.
Fact:  There is no authentic information that proves an Indian student from St. Xavier’s High School in Mumbai, found a cure for the COVID-19 and that this cure was accepted by the WHO. Apart from vaccination, WHO has not approved any medicine or home remedy to cure COVID-19. Hence, the claim made in the post is FALSE.
When we searched to check if any Indian student from St. Xavier’s High School in Mumbai has found a cure for COVID-19, we could not find any news articles or any other credible source reporting the same. If WHO approves such a home remedy to cure COVID-19, several media outlets would have reported the same.
Regarding the cure mentioned in the post, many news reports mentioned that the mixture (Pepper powder + Honey + Ginger juice) is a good remedy for cold, cough, and to boost immunity. Those reports can be seen here, here, and here. But none of these reports claimed it as the remedy to cure COVID-19.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has debunked some myths that are being spread around COVID-19. One of the myths debunked by WHO states that including hot pepper powder (one of the ingredients mentioned in the post) in food cannot cure or prevent COVID-19.
As of 18 February 2021, WHO approved at least seven vaccines for COVID-19 across the world. Apart from vaccination, WHO has not approved any medicine to cure COVID-19. The Mythbusters section on the WHO website states that ‘To date, there is no specific medicine to prevent or treat the COVID-19′.
Earlier, when a similar message was shared with a narrative of WHO approving the home remedy by a Pondicherry university student, FACTLY published a fact-check article on it. It can be read here.
To sum it up, the World Health Organization (WHO) has not accepted any COVID-19 home remedy found by an Indian student.


text:
Who is guarding our International Borders? - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 21, 2016
Here is our explainer video on who guards India’s International Borders?
The Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), commonly known as the Paramilitary forces, guard the six different international borders. The Border Security Force (BSF), Indo-Tibetan Border  Police (ITBP), Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) and Assam Rifles (AR) are involved the border guarding duties.


text:
Who is paying the Train fare of Migrants?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 6, 2020
There has been a war of words between the BJP & the Congress about the fare of the special trains being run to carry stranded migrants. But is there a fare for these trains? If yes, who is footing the bill? Here are the details.
A war of words broke out between major politicalparties about the train fare of migrants. While the Congress party announced that it would bear the cost of train travel of migrants, the BJP hitback in an official statement and accused the Congress of spreading falsehoods. TheBJP in its statement said that the Railways is bearing 85% of the total costwhile the state governments are asked to bear the remaining 15%. Between thepolitical war of words, who is actually paying for the train fare of themigrants?
MHA issues guidelines for travel of migrants
After repeated pleas from various quarters, theMinistry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued orders dated 29 April 2020, that allowed for travel ofstranded migrants. The order also specified that respective state governmentstalk to each other and enable travel of these stranded migrants by road and inbuses.  After the request of states, theMHA further allowed running special trains for their travel. The MHA also said that the Ministry of Railways will issue detailed guidelines for saleof tickets, social distancing and other safety measures.
The MHA further modified its order on 03 May 2020, clarifying that the earlier orders were meantfor travel of only those who moved from their native places just beforelockdown and could not return.
Did the Ministry of Railways fix a fare for these
special trains?
The Ministry of Railways (MoR) issued multiplecirculars to enable the travel of migrants. Here is a chronology of thesecirculars.
01 May 2020: The MoR issued a circular specifying the fare for these special trains. As per this circular, thefare for these special trains would be fare for sleeper class express trainsplus a superfast charge of Rs. 30 and an additional charge of Rs. 20. In otherwords, the total fare would be express train sleeper fare plus Rs. 50.
02 May 2020: The MoR issued detailed guidelines regarding these shramik special trains. Among other things, the guidelines talk about capacity, social distancing, safety precautions etc. In these guidelines, it is made clear that the state government shall handover the tickets to the passengers, collect the ticket fare and handover the total amount to railways.
On the same day, the MoR tweeted clarifying that only special trains are being run on the request of state governments and that no other train is being run. The tweet also asks people not to come to stations since no tickets are being sold at any station. What it meant is that there are no retail ticket sales and the tickets for identified migrants would be given to the relevant state governments only.
The Railways have also started issuing circulars with details of these special trains. The circularincludes tentative schedule, composition etc. The circular issued for theLingampalli (Hyderabad) – Hatia (Jharkhand) can be seen here.
Who is paying this fare?
From the guidelines and other circulars issued by theMoR, it is clear that there is no individual sale of tickets. Only thoseauthorized by the respective state governments will be allowed to travel onthese special trains. The tickets for all these migrants will be issueddirectly to the state governments who in turn have to pay the total amount torailways. While this process is clear, there is still no clarity on who isfooting this bill.
Certain reports in the media indicate that migrantshave been charged fare in certain places by the state governments. Some ofthese press reports can be read here and here. In some states, the respective state governments have agreed to foot the bill. The Telangana ChiefMinister KCR announced that his government is footing the bill towards the train fare.
What about the 85% subsidy that the BJP is talking
about?
The BJP in its official party statement as well multiple spokespersons of the BJP made a mention of the 85% cost being borneby the Railways. It has to be noted that the government has however not issuedany official statement on this figure except for a mention of this  by the representative of the Health Ministryin the standard press briefing on 04 May 2020.
BJP general secretary B L Santhosh broke this figuredown in a tweet and said that the Railways already subsidizes 57% of the passengerfare. He said that the additional 28% is because of the unique circumstances ofthese special trains (social distancing, empty return journey). There is nofurther clarification on these figures by anybody within the government.
Does the Railways subsidize 57% of the passenger fare?
It is a known fact that the passenger business of the railways is loss making since the railways subsidizes the passenger fare to a certain extent. However, this amount is not 57% as tweeted by the BJP general secretary, but 43%. In fact, on all the e-tickets issued on the IRCTC website, the statement about this subsidy is prominently written. The statement reads, ‘Are you aware that 43% of your fare is borne by the common citizens of the country?’
In fact, this message on the e-ticket becamecontroversial when an army personnel took offence to this message and tweetedthe same to the then Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. She then explained that the subsidy message is being printed for all railway passengersand not confined to defence personnel.
The 43% subsidy is true and, it means that 43% if the cost incurred on passenger operationsit is borne by railways and not collected from passengers. The fare being paid by passengers is after this subsidy of 43%. However, this is not specific to the shramik special trains and is extended by railways even during normal times. Furthermore, there is no information available to conclude that the overall subsidy is 85% in the case of shramik trains.
Summary
To summarize, here is what can be concluded fromavailable information from official government sources.
Is there a fare for the shramik special trains being
used to carry stranded migrants?
Yes, the fare for these trains is express trainsleeper fare plus Rs. 50.
Who is paying this fare?
In some states, there are reports of migrants beingasked to pay this amount while in others, the respective state governments arefooting this bill.
What about the Central Government subsidy of 85%?
The railways subsidizes the passenger fare and bears 43% of the cost incurred on passenger operations. However, this is true even during normal times and hence not a special subsidy extended for these shramik trains. Furthermore, there is no further information available to arrive at the figure of 85%.
Featured Image: Who is paying the Train fare of Migrants


text:
Who received the most recommendations for 2018 Padma Awards?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 22, 2019
The MHA put out the list of recommendations received on the Padma Awards portal. For the 2018 Padma Awards, more than 35000 recommendations were received with one individual getting more than 4000 recommendations.
Starting from the  year 2017, the government has opened up the recommendations for the various Padma Awards and has asked citizens to recommend individuals through a centralized web portal. A total of 84 Padma Awards were announced for the year 2018 including two duo awards. Like in 2017, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) released the list of recommendations received for the 2018 awards. Here is an analysis of the recommendations as released by the MHA.
More than 35000 recommendations received in 2018
As per the list released by MHA, a total of 35595 recommendations were received from various individuals, central/state governments and others. Number of recommendations in 2018 was almost twice the number received in 2017. While some of these are duplicate recommendations, more than 7000 distinct individuals were recommended.  The most such recommendations were received for individuals from Maharashtra (9755) followed by those from Andhra Pradesh (7161). Both these states top the charts because of a few individuals who received hundreds of recommendations. More than 1000 recommendations each were received for individuals from 8 states. Only one recommendation was received for an individual from Daman & Diu, the least for any State/UT. Less than 10 recommendations were received for individuals from Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya & Nagaland.
Most recommendations from Citizens
Recommendations were invited from various categories of people/institutions. More than 93% of the recommendations were received from citizens. NRIs made 553 recommendations followed by the State/UT Governments who made 312 recommendations. Padma Vibhushan awardees made 269 recommendations while Bharat Ratna awardees made 10 recommendations. Members of Parliament (MPs) made 242 recommendations while MLAs/MLCs made 121 recommendations. Governors made 77 & Chief Ministers made 38 recommendations.
31 of the awardees had no recommendations from the portal
Out of the 86 awardees for the year 2018 (including two duo awardees), 31 of them did not have any recommendation from the portal. In other words, 36% of the awardees for the year 2018 did not have any recommendation from the centralized portal. Out of the remaining 55 awardees, 35 of them were recommended by Citizens, 8 by the State/UT government, 7 by the Central Government Ministry, 1 by the Padma Vibhushan Awardee and 4 by the search committee. It is also interesting to note that only 4 of the 51 recommended by the search committee were awarded.
These individuals topped the recommendation charts
In 2017, the leader of Dera Sacha Sauda, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh had received more than 4000 recommendations, the highest for any individual. In 2018, it is the turn of Hanmant Rao Gaikwad, the founder of the BVG India group. He received more than 4000 recommendations in what appears to be coordinated campaign where some citizens had recommended his name multiple times. Next in the list is Maganti Murali Mohan, an MP from Andhra Pradesh belonging to the TDP. Also an artist in the Telugu Film industry, Murali Mohan received more than 2000 recommendations. Together, these two received more than 20% of all the recommendations in 2018.The next in the list is Bhogaraju Ramana Rao, a physician from Andhra Pradesh now settled in Bangalore. He received more than 1500 recommendations. Incidentally, he received the Padma Shri in the year 2010. Three (3) other individuals received more than 1000 recommendations each,; Umar Alisha (Peetadhipathi of Viswa Viznana Vidya Adhyatmika Peetham), Chaganti Koteshwara Rao (a speaker known for his discourses on Sanatana Dharma) and Nagnath Alli of the Samarth Sadguru sansthan. A total of 33 individuals received more than 100 recommendations each and made up for more than 55% of all the recommendations. None of them with more than 500 recommendations finally received the Padma award.  There were also a few dummy names  in the recommendation list.

created: January 22, 2019


text:
Who Recommended Vajpayee for Bharat Ratna - Infographic - Factly
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 19, 2014
Now that former PM Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee has been conferred the Bharat Ratna, it’s time to know who all recommended him for India’s highest civilian honour. Here are some of them who recommended Vajpayee for Bharat Ratna as an infographic.
Here is a hilarious true story of E. Prabhakaran, who is recommended not just Vajpayee for Bharat Ratna but also himself.

created: December 19, 2014


text:
Why are contributions to CMRF not treated as CSR expenditure?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 17, 2020
Both the Central & State governments have appealed to corporates & citizens to donate to the respective funds in order to help the governments combat COVID-19. Contributions are pouring into these funds. However, unlike the contributions to the PM CARES or the PMNRF, contributions made to CMRF at the state level are not treated as CSR expenditure. We look into this issue in detail.
Thegovernment of India has on 28 March 2020, announced the constitution of a new trust fund called  ‘PM CARES’ as part of fight against COVID-19. Therationale of creating a new Trust fund to handle an epidemic, when PMNRF alreadyexists for the same purpose, has been questioned by many. Factly has earlier writtena story on this issue.
The press
release that followed the tweet of the Prime Minister, hadscant details of ‘PM CARES’. Subsequently, clarifications were issued by thegovernment about some of the aspects related to this new Trust fund. One suchis the memorandum issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), regarding the eligibility ofcontributions made towards PM CARES as CSR spending. As per this memorandum,all the contributions that are made to PM CARES shall qualify as CSRexpenditure under the Companies Act 2013.
What
is CSR expenditure?
Section
135 of the Companies Act 2013  mandates qualifying companies to spend astipulated amount under Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).  As per the existing provisions, every companythat fulfils any of the below criteria (during a financial year) is required toconstitute a CSR Committee.
Thecompany is required to spend every financial year, at least 2% of the averagenet profits made during the three immediately preceding financial years towardstheir CSR activities.
Companies (Corporate Social
Responsibility Policy) Rules, 2014  later notified by the Central Governmentstate that CSR expenditure includes expenditure made towards the CSR activitieswhich are approved by the board and recommended by CSR committee and are inline with the permissible activities listed in Schedule VII of Companies Act 2013.
Contribution
to relief fund set up Central Government is part of the approved list
Inthe clarification issued post the announcement of PM CARES fund by the PrimeMinister, the MCA alluded to item (viii) under Schedule VII of Companies Act 2013to justify the qualification of contribution to PM CARES as permissible CSR expenditure.
SectionVII of Companies act 2013 provides the list
of activities that are eligible to be considered as CSR activitiesand any expenditure incurred towards these activities will be counted as CSRexpenditure.
As per this list, item (viii) refers to the contributions that are made to PMNRF or any other fund which is setup by the Central government for Socio-economic development, relief, welfare of SC, ST, BC, minorities and women.
SincePM CARES fund is established to provide relief for emergency & distresssituations, the contributions made to it are eligible to be treated as CSRexpenditure by companies.
Contributions
to State relief funds not qualified as CSR expenditure
Whilethe purpose of creating a PM CARES despite the existence PMNRF has not clearlyexplained by the government, one of the points being put forward informally is thatit would be a more dedicated fund to be used for the epidemic on hand and anyothers that arise in the future.
Sincethe respective State governments are at the fore-front of tackling the current epidemic, there are suggestions around the need forcontributions to be made to support the state efforts. CM relief funds andother State relief funds are few sources through which the states can raise therequired resources to be utilized for relief activities.
Apartfrom the individual contributions, donations from corporates form a major part ofthe contributions made to such relief funds.
Sincethe contributions to the new fund i.e. PM CARES will be  considered as  permissible CSR expenditure, there werequeries around the eligibility of contributions being made to Chief Minister’sRelief Fund (CMRF) at the state level.
To provide clarity, on 10April 2020,MCA released ‘COVID-19 related Frequently
Asked Questions (FAQs) on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)’ .
As per these FAQs:
While the rationale for theinclusion of PM CARES has already been discussed, the eligibility ofcontributions to State Disaster Management Authority is in reference to MCA’s clarification issued on 23 March 2020.
However, the reason for notincluding contributions made to CMRF or other State Relief funds is that theseare not included in Schedule VII of Companies Act 2013, which was the basis forinclusion of PM CARES fund. It has to be noted that currently, the list ofitems in Schedule VII only mentions about the funds set up by Centre and doesnot include any mention of the states.
Companies Act passed by the
Parliament in 2013 included State Funds also
Schedule VII of the Companies Act -2013, passed by the parliamentand notified by August 2013 included the funds set up by State Governments forrelief to be considered as CSR expenditure.
Point IX of Schedule VIImentions thus,
“contribution to the Prime Minister’s National
Relief Fund or any other fund set up by the Central Government or the
State Governments for socio-economic development and relief ………….”
However, this has been subsequently amended and the rules relating to CSR  contributions under this law has did notinclude the funds set up by the state governments.
The reasons for removing ‘State’ funds’ fromthe permissible list of activities is not documented in any of availablesources.
Encouraging corporate donations under CSR to
State funds would help states
Donations by corporates are generally higherthan the individual contributions. Including corporate donations to CMRF or anyother state level relief fund in the list of CSR activities would encouragemore corporates to come forward and donate to these funds.
The setup, functioning and rationale of State relief funds and CMRF are similar to that of PM CARES fund i.e. these funds provide for a focussed source of resources in terms of tackling an epidemic or disaster and such relief efforts. In fact, contributions to both these funds are 100% exempt under section 80G of the Income Tax act.
Since the central government has allowed forfunds donated to State Disaster Management Authority to be treated as CSRexpenditure, it would be prudent to extend the same even for CMRF and otherState relief funds, which are more popular with the common public.
Furthermore, there is greater likelihood of corporatescontributing to the relief efforts locally (place of operations) i.e. withinthe state rather than at national level.
States have started looking at overcoming this technical hurdle. In Tamil Nadu, the CM has directed the funds under Chief Minister’s Public Relief Fund (CMPRF) to be diverted to Tamil Nadu State Disaster Management Authority (SDMA) since the contributions made to SDMA qualify as CSR expenditure.
Apart from Tamil Nadu, Telangana has also taken a similar action. As per the G.O issued by the government, all the contributions that are made to CMRF since 24 March 2020 would be allocated to Telangana State Disaster Management Authority. Thereby these contributions would qualify as CSR expenditure.
It is high time that the central government has a relook at its position of not allowing contributions to CMRF and other state relief funds to be part of CSR expenditure, in this critical hour of need.
Featured Image: CSR expenditure


text:
Why are discounted SMS rates not valid on certain days?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
July 31, 2015
Many of you might have received that customary message from your Telecom Service Provider about discounted and free SMS rates not being valid on certain days. But what are the rules that govern these days? Can they have as many days as they want? The answer lies in the definition of Black Out days as defined by The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) that each service provider cannot have more than a maximum of 5 such black out days.


text:
Why are discounted SMS rates not valid on certain days?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 1, 2019
Why are discounted SMS rates not valid on certain days? What are the rules that govern these days? Can Mobile operators specify as many days as they wish?  Here is an explainer.
Many of you might have received that customary message from your Telecom Service Provider (mobile operators) about discounted and free SMS rates not being valid on certain days.  Why is that mobile operators charge normal rates on some specific days and not charge us the usual package rate on these days? The answer lies in ‘Black Out Days’ as listed by the respective service provider.
Transparency in Tariff Offers
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the apex regulatory body in the telecom sector issued detailed direction in September, 2008 to all telecom service providers regarding transparency in their tariff offers. The direction was an outcome of large number of complaints from consumers and consumer organizations that the tariffs plans offered by the service providers are complex to understand and are confusing, which makes it difficult for consumers to make an informed choice.
TRAI initiated a consultation process on this issue and also held open house discussions before coming up with these directions. The directions were issued in four broad areas namely
Key Tariff Information
TRAI directed all telecom service providers to provide detailed information to consumers on each tariff plan offered by them in both Vernacular & English language. The information about each plan should include the following:
Not just this, all this information has to be prominently displayed at all the retail outlets of the telecom service providers.
Promotional Offers
All the service providers must provide the following information to public with respect to any promotional offer,
Barrier in cases of migration from one plan to another in certain cases
No service provider should put any condition or barrier such as the requirement of obtaining new SIM or change of telephone number, etc., to a consumer who wishes to migrate across plans or across postpaid and prepaid platforms.
The Black Out Days
Coming to black out days, TRAI has allowed the service providers to fix a maximum of five (5) ‘black out’ days in a calendar year. ‘Black out’ days are those days on which free or concessional Voice Calls/SMS offered under any plan/ package including discounted rates are not valid. Normal rates will be applicable on these blackout days. In the beginning of each year, the telecom service providers are asked to specify the ‘black out’ days for that year. They are free to specify different set of dates for each telecom circle. Different service providers can fix different black out days. But once they are fixed, the dates cannot be modified. For example, the list of black out days for 2018 has different days listed for different circles.
The service providers are supposed to clearly indicate the following to the consumer before opting for any package.
In addition, all the service providers are supposed to display the list of black out days on their website. For instance, the list of blackout days for Airtel can be accessed here. TRAI has also issued additional directions in the year 2012 to improve transparency in the communication of black out days to the consumers. In its directions, TRAI mentioned the following.
Those of you who wish to know more about the rights of a telecom consumer are encouraged to read the Consumers’ Handbook on Telecommunications by TRAI.

created: January 1, 2019


text:
Why are Electoral Bonds not available in some cities? Because SBI is yet to update the software
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
July 9, 2018
In response to an application under RTI, the government mentioned ‘updation/modification’ of the software as the reason for not extending the electoral bonds scheme to states like Telangana, Kerala & Andhra Pradesh.
Factly had earlier written about the lack of demand for electoral bonds of smaller denomination in the first three cycles of sale that took place in March, April & May 2018. While it is widely accepted that electoral bonds increase anonymity and do not enhance transparency in any manner, there is another equally important issue of unbridled government control over the selection of cities where the bonds would be available for purchase.
Electoral Bonds available for purchase only in 11 cities
The electoral bond scheme was notified in January 2018 and the first sale cycle of 10 days was in March 2018. The bonds were available for purchase only in the four metro cities of New Delhi, Kolkata, Mumbai & Chennai in the March cycle. For the April, May, & July cycles, the number of cities was increased to eleven (11).
Since the electoral bonds have to be purchased/collected by physically visiting the designated SBI bank branch, it is highly impossible for someone in the states of Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Odisha, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jammu & Kashmir and Goa to purchase the electoral bonds since no SBI branch is authorized to sell electoral bonds in these states. In other words, citizens & other entities in these 11 states are being kept out of this scheme. It has to be noted that regional parties are ruling some of these states and they are at a great disadvantage.Even in states where a SBI branch is authorized, it is very difficult for a common citizen to travel to the state capital to purchase a bond. For all the eight (8) North-Eastern states, only the SBI branch in Guwahati has been authorized to sell these bonds. Given the connectivity and difficult terrain of the North-East, it can be assumed that the bonds are not available for most people in these states.
Violation of the scheme guidelines
When the scheme was notified in January this year, the guidelines mentioned that the bonds would be available for purchase for 10 days each in the months of January, April , July & October. But in 2018, the bonds were available for purchase for 10 days each in the months of  March, April, May and July. The months of March & May were not mentioned in the original notification. Though the central government can specify an additional period of 30 days, that can be done only in the year when the Lok Sabha elections are due i.e., 2019 and not in the current year (2018).
‘Software updation’ – the reason for not extending this to other cities
In response to an RTI application that sought the reasons for not extending the electoral bonds to SBI branches in the rest of the states, the Department of Economic Affairs, Government of India mentioned ‘Software Updation/Modification’ as the reason for not extending the scheme to all the cities. There are two basic questions that remain unanswered in this age of technology. Why would updation/modification of software take so many months and why is  updation/modification of software city specific?
Such flimsy reasons give credence to the belief that government is intentionally keeping certain states/cities out of the scheme.


text:
Why are some States not part of ‘Ayushman Bharat’?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 26, 2018
Some states like Andhra Pradesh & Telangana have not signed a MoU for implementing the ‘Ayushman Bharat’ scheme. Here is looking at the reasons.
‘Ayushman Bharat’ or the ‘Prime Minister’s Jan Aarogya Yojana’ (PM JAY) was launched recently by the Government of India. This health insurance scheme aims to cover 10 crore families based on Socio Economic & Caste Census (SECC) data.
PM JAY is a centrally sponsored sheme where the Center & States will share the expenditure in the ratio of 60:40 for all normal states. This is as per the new guidelines issued by the Ministry of Finance in 2015 for all centrally sponsored schemes.
As per the information shared by the government in the Lok Sabha, 25 States/UTs have signed up for the scheme as of July 2018. Why have some states like Telangana & Andhra Pradesh not signed up for ‘Ayushman Bharat’?
Difference in Eligibility Criteria is a major issue
States like Andhra Pradesh & Telangana have an active health insurance scheme that is running for more than 10 years. The Aarogyasri scheme, that is being implemented in these Telugu speaking states was launched in 2007. This scheme differs from ‘Ayushman Bharat’ majorly in terms of the eligibility criteria.
The objection of these states is mainly about the eligibility criteria which leaves out a number of beneficiaries that are currently being served under the Aarogyasri scheme. While the Ayushman Bharat scheme uses the deprivation conditions in SECC as eligibility criteria, the Aarogyasri scheme is extened to all those who hold a Annapurna card or the AAY ration card. The difference in eligibility criteria will result in a reduction of benefiairies which is a major bone of contention between the center & these states.
Ayushman Bharat does cover the entire household without any cap on the family size or age. But for the household to qualify, it must satisfy one of the deprivation condition as per the SECC-Rural and belong to one of the listed occupation as per SECC-Urban.  It also has to be noted that all those households who fulfill any of the following 14 criteria are automatically excluded and they are not counted as households reporting deprivation and hence not eligible for Ayushman Bharat.
Number of beneficiaries in these states will reduce with ‘Ayushman Bharat’
The estimation on the number of beneficiary households  indicates that there could be a significant reduction in the number of benefiaciaries if these two states go ahead with ‘Ayushman Bharat’. As per official data, in the year 2017-18, 1.42 crore families were covered under Aarogyasri in Andhra Pradesh while 77.19 lakh families were covered in Telangana.  Though the exact number of beneficiary households under Ayushman Bharat is not available, calculations based on the number of households considered for deprivation under SECC-Rural,  does indicate a significant reduction in the number of benefiaries if these states were to implement Ayushman Bharat. There is almost a 50% reduction in the number of estimated beneficary households.
Under ‘Ayushman Bharat’, the benefit cover Rs 5 lakh per family per year where as the benefit cover under the existing Aarogyasri Scheme is Rs 2.5 lakh per family per year in Andhra Pradesh and Rs 2 lakh per family per year in Telangana. In the Aarogyasri scheme in Telangana, certain specific procedures like Organ transplant have a coverage upwards of Rs 10 lakh.
Unless the eligibility & other related issues are settled, these states may continue with their own scheme.
Featured Image: Ayushman Bharat scheme

created: September 26, 2018


text:
Why did the Law Commission recommend Abolition of ‘Death Penalty’ except in cases of Terror?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 1, 2015
The Law Commission of India submitted its 262nd report on the issue of ‘Death Penalty’ in India. The commission, in its report, discussed issues ranging from death penalty being a deterrent, to changing International & National scenario to arbitrariness in the decision making & existence of bias as some of the reasons for recommending abolition of death penalty except in cases of terrorism related offences.
The Law Commission of India finally submitted its much publicized report on the contentious issue of ‘Death Penalty’. In this report, it recommended abolition of Death Penalty except in cases of Terrorism related offences. The commission received a wide range of suggestions from various quarters including from the likes of the former President Dr. Abdul Kalam.
The commission recommended that the death penalty be abolished for all crimes except for terrorism related offences and waging war. The commission came to this conclusion based on the following reasons
Background
The Law Commission of India received a reference from the Supreme Court in Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. Maharashtra and Shankar Kisanrao Khade v. Maharashtra to study the issue of the death penalty in India to “allow for an up-to-date and informed discussion and debate on the subject.”
But, this is not the first time that the Commission has looked into the issue of death penalty. The 35th Report of the Law Commission looked into the issue of Capital Punishment in 1967. That Report recommended the retention of the death penalty in India.
The Supreme Court has also upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty, but confined its application to the ‘rarest of rare cases’, to reduce the arbitrariness of the penalty. The Law Commission of India however felt that the social, economic and cultural contexts of the country have changed drastically since the 35th report in 1967. Arbitrariness has remained a major concern in the adjudication of death penalty cases in the 35 years since the precedent was laid down by the Supreme Court in 1980.
The Issues
The Law Commission mentioned the following six factors that necessitated a fresh look at this issue since the 35 report of the commission already dealt with this issue.
History of Death Penalty in India
During the debates of the constituent assembly, the main architect of the Indian Constitution, Dr. B R Ambedkar was personally in favour of the abolition of death penalty. After Independence, India retained several laws put in place by the colonial government including the Code of Criminal Procedure (1898) and the Indian Penal Code, IPC (1860). The IPC prescribed six punishments that could be imposed including death.
The Code of Criminal Procedure was again enacted in 1973 and many notable changes were made to the then existing colonial law including the one to Section 354(3), that now required reasons to be stated whenever death penalty is imposed in cases where imprisonment for life could have been imposed.
The Supreme Court also looked into the issue of death penalty in various cases. Most notably, it adopted the ‘rarest of rare’ guideline in the Bachan Singh case of 1980. The court noted that reasons to impose or not impose the death penalty must include the circumstances of the crime and the criminal. On various occasions, the court also expressed concern over the delay in execution.
Laws on Death Penalty in India
Under the IPC, the death sentence may be imposed for twelve different offences including Murder, Rape etc. Apart from IPC, several other laws also prescribe the death penalty as a possible punishment. As per the commission’s report, there are about 22 such laws in the country including The Air Force Act, 1950, The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act,1967 etc.
International Trends
Much has changed since the 35 report of the Law Commission report in 1967. More countries have abolished the death penalty since then. Internationally, countries are classified on their death penalty status, based on the following categories (as per standards of the United Nations)
At the end of 2014, 98 countries abolished death penalty for all crimes. 7 countries have abolished it for ordinary crimes and 35 countries have abolished it in practice or de facto (executions did not take place). 58 countries have retained the death penalty including India. Three of the 98 countries (Suriname, Madagascar and Fiji) formally abolished the death penalty in 2015.
Though the number of countries that still retain the death penalty is in a minority, the list includes the most populous nations of the world like India, China, USA & Indonesia. That in way is an indication that a large part of the world population is still subject to this punishment. About 40% of the countries in the Asia-Pacific are retentionists, and maintain and use the death penalty. China, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia remain amongst the highest executors globally. India is one of the few big countries in the world that executes convicts on the death row along with China, Iran, Iraq & Saudi Arabia.
There are also international treaties like ‘The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)’. Though this does not abolish the use of the death penalty, it contains guarantees regarding the right to life, and contains important safeguards to be followed by signatories who retain the death penalty. At present 168 countries including India are parties to ICCPR.
Death Penalty as a Deterrent is a Myth
One of the arguments for the retention of death penalty is that it has a deterrence value and prevents individuals from committing crimes because of the threat of punishment. The commission in its report concluded that there is no empirical evidence to suggest that the death penalty has a deterrent effect over and above its alternative – life imprisonment. The report cites various international studies debunking the theory of deterrence. The Report also mentions the United Nations (‘UN’), which has consistently held that there is no conclusive evidence on deterrence and the death penalty. The UN, in Reports published as recently as 2014 has noted that no evidence of deterrence can be presumed to exist. The UN has also noted that deterrence is nothing more than a “myth.
Sentencing in Capital Offences – Arbitrariness
The Supreme Court in the recent times has advocated the three test theory in deciding the death penalty cases. It means “that three tests have to be satisfied before awarding the death penalty: the crime test, meaning the aggravating circumstances of the case; the criminal test, meaning that there should be no mitigating circumstance favouring the accused; and if both tests are satisfied, then the rarest of rare cases test, “which depends on the perception of the society and not “judge-centric”, that is whether the society will approve the awarding of death sentence to certain types of crime or not. While applying this test, the Court has to look into variety of factors like society’s abhorrence, extreme indignation and antipathy to certain types of crimes…”
Even with such framework in place, there have been geographical variations in the numbers. Data gathered by the National Crimes Record Bureau on death sentences indicates that in the period between 2000 and 2012, 1677 death sentences were imposed by Indian courts. On an average, India sends on average 129 persons to death row every year, or roughly one person every third day. Juxtaposing the NCRB data on death sentences imposed against the overall convictions for murder during the period 2004-2012, convictions were recorded by courts in 180439 cases involving murder. In the same time period, the death sentence was imposed in 1178 cases, that is, in 0.65% of the cases involving murder convictions.
As per the report, the excessive use of the death penalty is clear by another figure supplied by the Supreme Court to the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic, National Law University, Delhi, and presented at the National Consultation indicates that between 2000- 2015, trial courts imposed the death sentence on 1790 persons. Of these, 1512 cases were decided by the High Court. The remaining are either still pending, or their judgments have not been located. In 62.8% of these 1512 cases, the appellate courts commuted the sentence. That is, though the appellate courts agreed with the trial court on conviction, they rejected the court’s sentencing. In another 28.9 % of the cases where the trial court awarded the death sentence, or roughly a third, ended in acquittal, pointing to an even deeper systemic problem relating to the quality of adjudication in the lower courts. In all, the death sentence was confirmed only in 4.3% of the cases. The Supreme Court’s data thus shows that trial courts erroneously impose the death penalty in 95.7% cases. There are many other cases where the judges disagreed with each other.
Sentencing in Capital Offences – Geographical Variations
The NCRB data cited above also points to geographical variations. When broken down by state, the rate of imposition of death sentences as a percentage of the rate of convictions for murder for the period 2004-12, shows significant disparity by state. Compared to the rest of the country, a murder convict in Kerala is about twice as likely to get the death sentence; a murder convict in Jharkhand is 2.4 times as likely to get the death sentence compared to the rest of the country. This number for Gujarat is 2.5 times, for West Bengal 3 times, for Karnataka 3.2 times, for Delhi 6 times, and for Jammu and Kashmir 6.8 times. Though Uttar Pradesh sends the most number of persons to the death row, but as a proportion of the conviction rate for murder, it is about par with the national average. Karnataka was the second largest contributor to the death row in this period, and its death sentence rate was 3.2 times the national average.
Systemic & Structural Concerns – Existence of Bias
The report mentions that the data on death penalty indicates the existence of disparity in the imposition of the death penalty, reflecting systemic and structural disadvantages, particularly of the socially and economically marginalized.
The data presented to the commission by the Death Penalty Research Project of National Law University, Delhi indicates that out of 373 prisoners on death row in the country, over 75% belong to backward classes and religious minorities. 93.5% of those sentenced to death for terror offences are religious minorities or Dalits. The data also showed that nearly 74% of convicts were economically vulnerable.
The issue of disposal of mercy petitions by the President and the ensuing delay was also discussed in the commission’s report.
Recommendations
The commission concluded that death penalty does not serve the goal of deterrence any more than life imprisonment. The commission made the following recommendations
Three members of the commission namely, Justice (retd.) Ms Usha Mehra, Mr PK Malhotra, Law Secretary and Dr. Sanjay Singh, Secretary, Legislative Department, chose not to sign the Report and have submitted notes on the issue.

created: September 1, 2015


text:
Why do 'Digital Initiatives' of the Government fail? Here is one example
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 26, 2017
The CIC launched an online application to file appeals & complaints. But as this author finds out, this system is like new wine in old bottle and provides a perfect example as to why digital initiatives of the government fail.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) who is the adjudicatory authority for appeals & complaints under the Right to Information (RTI) act launched its new web portal recently. A new online appeal & complaint system was also launched simultaneously  with much pomp & show. The online system is supposed to simplify the process of filing appeals & complaints to the CIC. But as the experience of this author shows, the less said the better about the new system. It is like new wine in old bottle. Nothing seems to have changed for the citizen.
Appeal & Complaint to the CIC
As per Sec 18 & 19 of the RTI act, a citizen can file a complaint or an appeal to the CIC when he/she has either not received any information to the RTI request or is not satisfied with the response. The appeal or complaint has to be filed in accordance with the rules notified in 2012. In general, an appeal to the CIC should be accompanied by the following documents
All these documents are relevant for a physical appeal. According to the CIC, to simplify this process, the CIC had introduced the online appeal & complaint process. It also has to be noted that an application under RTI to most central government departments can be filed via the RTI Online portal of the Government of India, which is being extensively used by citizens. In fact, the number of RTI applications filed through this portal has increased to 24% in 2015-16 from 11% in 2013-14. For applications filed using this portal, a physical copy of the application or an appeal do not exist.
‘Online’ – Only in the name?
One of the fundamental flaws with the new system is that it is not connected to RTI online. It prompts the user to enter a RTI registration number. But when it is entered, it throws a message saying the number is not found. This author tried with at least 10 valid RTI application registration numbers from the RTI online portal and the result was the same for all of them.
For eg., an application under RTI was filed online with the Central Electricity Authority in April, 2017 with registration number ‘CEATY/R/2017/50043.
This registration number was not be found in the online appeal application of the CIC. Same was the fate of at least 10 other registration numbers.
For an online application, now generate pdf copies of all documents
When the RTI application itself was filed online, there is nothing like a physical copy with the applicant. But still the online appeal application prompts the citizen to mandatorily upload the pdf documents of the application, response and the first appeal. One wonders if this is what CIC meant by going digital.This author took pains to convert his online application into pdf and uploaded all the required documents. The online appeal application also asks for an ID proof to ensure that no impersonation takes place.
After going through all that is explained above, this author was elated reading these instructions once again, that no hard copy is required after the online appeal is submitted. But that elation was short lived.
Why didn’t you submit signed copies?
But looks like some employees in the CIC were unaware of these instructions.  A few days after such appeals were filed online, the author started receiving these letters from the CIC. The letter reads that there are deficiencies in the online application and certain documents were not enclosed and others were not duly signed. Please remember that the application does not allow a person to submit the appeal unless the relevant documents are uploaded. One wonders where did all the uploaded documents vanish.
Digital CIC a façade?
The entire process was just frustrating. One wonders how could the CIC ignore & overlook such basic issues when the online application was launched. Going digital looks like a façade than a step to simplify the process. And as an after thought, the CIC realized a few months after the application was launched that a signed copy should not be insisted upon. It issued a circular in April 2017 to this effect.
The online appeal application of the CIC is a perfect example of why digital initiatives of governments fail. Looks like common sense is not so common after all.


text:
Why Do People Travel
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 2, 2016

created: December 2, 2016


text:
Why Indian MPs disclosure of ‘Conflict of Interests’ is inadequate and dysfunctional - Factly
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 27, 2015
In an earlier piece, the standing committee on ethics and its functioning was discussed at length. In this piece, the specific instances of conflict of interest of Indian MPs and how the existing framework is grossly inadequate to deal with such cases is discussed. The global standards of disclosure of conflict of interest are also discussed.
In May this year, Shyam Charan Gupta, the Member of Parliament from Allahabad in the Lok Sabha, made a rather dubious proposition that there was no causal relationship between tobacco consumption and cancer. As specious as the argument itself is, equally disconcerting is the fact that Gupta was speaking as a member of the Parliamentary committee on subordinate legislation, which was examining a proposal to allocate 85% of the surface area of tobacco products to graphic pictorial warnings. The panel eventually mandated that the proposal should be dropped, never mind that EU and other countries strictly follow that norm. What is perhaps most discomforting is the fact that Gupta is a Bidi baron, with family interests in the tobacco industry, which makes it amply clear as to why he was opposed to a move such as this- a clear case of business interests trumping public health concerns or what in governance parlance would be termed ‘Conflict of Interest’.
Elected representatives (or indeed any public servants) have an important public role to perform in legislating policy. Hence mature democracies have a clear separation of private and public interests of public servants, such that they don’t influence MPs role as public servants. It is precisely for the reasons, as the instance above suggests that MPs are required to disclose all their financial and non-financial interests that may have a bearing on discharging their functions as public servants.
Unfortunately, in India’s case, both the disclosure of ‘conflict of interests’ as well as the strict demarcation being laid out in a strong law are both inadequate and dysfunctional
What is wrong with India’s conflict of interest disclosure regime?
The Indian disclosures fail on the following three different counts
Nonexistent or incomplete disclosures
For starters, it simply does not exist. Where it exists, it is inadequate disclosures and poor implementation.
As we wrote about in an earlier piece, a proper disclosure regime, judging by global standards, requires the Houses of Parliament to maintain a ‘Register of Interests’ under different categories, that mandates MPs to disclose their financial and non financial interests in a timely manner.
In India’s case, MPs of Lok Sabha are not mandated to disclose their interests except declaring their assets and liabilities. This explains how MPs such as Shyam Charan Gupta can become members of Standing Committees that have a direct influence on key legislations and policies without disclosing that they have direct business or financial interests to be gained from such policies.
While the rules of the Lok Sabha’s ethics panel suggest that ‘An MP may object to another MP joining a Parliamentary Committee on grounds that he has personal, pecuniary or direct interest’, in the absence of disclosure of such interests, it is difficult to object and bring to the notice of the Speaker, who can withhold the MPs vote. This is a key reason why strong procedures of registering MPs interest are followed in most mature democracies.
MPs of Rajya Sabha are mandated to disclose their interests under the Rule 293 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of Rajya Sabha. These interests are categorized under 5 heads:
Again, in most mature democracies, the categories of disclosure are much more detailed and minutely categorized ranging from financial interests to gifts, landholding and even lobbying activities. The table below suggests that such categories number from 12-14.
In the US senate, there is a very detailed e-disclosure process for registering senators’ interests.
Timely disclosures
In Rajya Sabha, the disclosures of interests are to be maintained and updated with changes on a yearly basis. However, in the absence of such disclosure data being absent in public domain by default, it can only be accessed by filing an RTI application. The data from an RTI filed by Association for Democratic Reforms shows of the 242 Rajya Sabha MPs, only 232 have declared their financial interests as part of the Register. This suggests that the Ethics Panel in the Rajya Sabha is not stringent about every member’s financial interest be mandatorily disclosed. Further, the data is available for the current (and some ex-members) for the years 2011, 2012 and 2014. Either the Rajya Sabha registry has not updated, maintained or disclosed the register for the year 2013, suggesting shoddy maintenance of a register that is the key for transparency.
Contrast this with other countries such as United Kingdom, USA, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, where interests are disclosed and maintained on a periodic basis. In the UK, MPs are supposed to register their financial interests within a month of their election to the House  Standards Committee and notify any changes to their interests that may occur during the term within a four week time frame of the change occurring. In Australia, MPs are obliged to notify changes to the ethics panel within 28 days of change occurring.
A look at the register of interests from Rajya Sabha suggests that MPs disclosures have remained unchanged since 2011. This might either be that no changes have taken place or Rajya Sabha ethics panel has poor oversight over the process, the latter being the most likely scenario.
Consider the case of Union minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, who was alleged by lawyer activist Prashant Bhushan to have been on the retainership of Fintech Corporation, an RIL company between April 2013 and March 2014, while also looking into the gas pricing issue. Prasad denied having any conflict of interest as he surrendered the retainership two months before he became a minister. As a member of Rajya Sabha, he was obliged to declare his interest either under ‘regular remunerated activity’ or ‘paid consultancy. However, in all the yearly registers since 2011, there is no mention of such an activity. Moreover, his ‘professional engagement’ disclosure shows an amount for 3,24,04,511 (3 crore+) for years 2011, 2012 and 2014. Since there is no change in his professional engagement earnings in the year 2014, when he became the minister, then either his claim of surrendering the retainership is not true or he has been insincere in his disclosures.
This again proves the point about not just maintaining registers but maintaining them well with granular details. It would seem at the moment that the Rajya Sabha ethics panel accepts information given to it in any format without stressing on the need for proper disclosures. Information such as Ravi Shankar Prasad’s, which is incomplete and does not give granular detail, is not very useful.
Even where MPs disclose their registered financial interests, the ethics panel in Rajya Sabha is quite lax in acting on apparent conflict of interests. Else, how could Vijay Mallya, who owned Kingfisher Airlines, sit on the parliamentary panel on civil aviation? The ethics panel in Rajya Sabha has the power to examine cases suo moto and the fact that neither Mr. Mallya recused himself or was objected to by other MPs shows that the overall functioning of the ethics panel is questionable.
As we wrote earlier, most democracies have an independent commissioner whose job it is to maintain the register of interests as well as launch investigations into an irregularity that has been reported on this issue.
No Conflict of Interest Law
Inadequate disclosures apart, India does not have a stringent Conflict of Interest law that could examine, investigate and punish cases of violating conflict of interests which allows the guilty to go scot free. Mizoram minister Lathanzara is a good example, whose son held shares in a food company that provides mid day meal services to the Government. When it appeared in the public domain, he merely resigned to recontest the seat again in the forthcoming by election. Not only does the law exclude family members from participating in Government contracts (at the moment only MPs/MLAs are excluded from bidding for government contracts), investigations into such breaches fall under the Prevention of Corruption Act, under which a probe can be ordered by the government of the day.
What India needs is a stringent system of public disclosures followed by a fool proof conflict of interest law. Earlier this year, a Congress MP EM Sudersana Natchiappan floated a Private Members Bill  called ‘The Prevention and Management of Conflict of Interest Bill, 2015’, which covers the duty of an authority or a body and an individual holding public office. It also deals with restrictions on gifts, services and benefits accepted by a person in public office.
In the absence of these disclosure and regulatory mechanisms, the so called new era of transparency will only be a partial exercise.
Featured Image Illustration icons from thenounproject.com

created: October 27, 2015


text:
Why is there no readjustment of Lok Sabha seats after every Census?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 8, 2019
The  electorate size per Lok Sabha constituency is not uniform across the country. Why is there no readjustment of Lok Sabha seats if the size of the electorate is varied?
The Lok Sabha general elections isthe time when one looks at all the numbers related to voters, constituenciesand what not. One of the issues that is not often discussed is the size of ourLok Sabha constituencies (in terms of number of voters) and how they vary fromstate to state. There are also issues like reorganization of theseconstituencies and delimitation. Here is a deep dive.
The average electorate size per seat
was 15.36 lakh in 2014 LS Elections
At an All-India level, the average electorate size per Lok Sabha constituency (seat) was 15.36 lakh during the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. But there are variations from state to state. Delhi had the highest average electorate size with 18.16 lakh voters per constituency followed by Uttar Pradesh with 17.35 lakh per constituency. In 11 of the 36 States/UTs, the average electorate size per constituency was more than the national average while it was less than the national average in the rest of them.
The lowest was in Lakshadweep wherethe number of registered voters was around 50000. The most number of voters ina constituency was in Malkajgiri from Telangana where the number of registeredvoters was 31.8 lakh in 2014. Out of the 543 constituencies, the averageelectorate size was more than the national average of 15.36 lakh in 293constituencies.
Even the number of assembly constituencies
is not uniform
Each Lok Sabha seat consists of a specificnumber of Assembly segments in States/UTs that have a legislative assembly. Thenumber of such segments vary from state to state. In most big states, thisnumber varies from 5 to 10 assembly segments per Lok Sabha seat. This number isvery high in the North-Eastern and smaller states because of the lowerpopulation. The highest number of assembly segments for a single Lok Sabha seatis in Nagaland where all the 60 assembly segments in the state are part of thesame Lok Sabha seat.
Is the number of Lok Sabha seats in
a State fixed forever?
Every now & then, the government sets up a ‘Delimitation Commission’. According to the Election Commission of India (ECI), Delimitation literallymeans the act or process of fixing limits or boundaries of constituencies inthe country or in states that have legislative bodies like the Lok Sabha or anassembly. Such a commission is expected to take note of changes in populationin various areas and adjust the number of constituencies accordingly.
Till date, such commissions have been constituted four times. The last such commission was constituted in 2002 which redrew the boundaries of various Lok Sabha constituencies. But the 2002 exercise was limited to  redrawing boundaries of constituencies within a state. It did not venture into readjusting the number of Lok Sabha seats  allocated to each state.
Why is there no readjustment of Lok Sabha seats after
every Census?
As per Article 82 of the Constitution of
India, there has tobe readjustment of seats after each census (every 10 years) and such adjustmentshould be based on the population.
However, this was not done becauseof the 42nd amendment
to the Constitution, more popularly known as the ‘Mini-Constitution’ that made widespreadchanges to the constitution during emergency days in 1976. ‘Population controland family planning’ was included in the concurrent list with this amendment.The government of the day was keen on promoting family planning and to controlpopulation growth.
Hence provisions were included inarticles 55, 82, 170 and 330 of the constitution not to make any changes to thenumber of Lok Sabha seats, Assembly seats etc. until the figures from the firstCensus after the year 2000 have been published. This was done as a measure toboost family planning norms. In other words, any readjustment to the totalnumber of seats had to take place only after the year 2000 when the 2001 Censusfigures would be published.
The NDA government extended this to
2026
The NDA government in the year 2001felt the need to amend the provisions included through the 42nd amendment sincethe 2001 Census figures were about to be published. The statement of objects tothe 84th amendment
to the constitution in 2001 mentions that there have been consistent demands, both forand against undertaking the exercise of readjustment. It further says thatconsidering the progress of family planning programs in different parts of thecountry, and as per the National Population Policy strategy, it was decided toextend the freeze on readjustment up to the year 2026. The government saw it asa motivational measure to encourage State Governments to pursue the agenda forpopulation stabilization. Thus the embargo on any readjustment to the totalnumber of seats was extended to 2026, meaning that any such readjustment canonly be done after the 2031 Census.
While readjustment or changing the number of seats is to be done onlyafter 2026, the 84th amendment allowed delimitation (process of fixing limitsor boundaries of territorial constituencies) or changing the reservation statusof the constituencies after the 2001 Census. This was to be done withoutaltering the total number of seats in a state. The Delimitation Act of 2002 served this purpose.
Is population growth uneven?
One of the prime reasons for freezing the readjustment of LokSabha/Assembly seats was to ensure uniform population growth in various states.If readjustment had to be done after each Census, states that have controlledpopulation growth would have lost out on the number of Lok Sabha seats &also on the value of its votes in the Presidential election while the ones thatdid not control stand to benefit.
Even till 2001, most states had a decadal
population growth rate between 20% & 30%. For the first time, between 2001 &2011, the decadal growth rate for most states had fallen to between 10% &20%. The number states growing over 30% had come down from 11 between 1981-91to 3 between 2001-11.
While northern states like Bihar, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh& Uttar Pradesh had a decadal growth rate over 20% in the 2001-11 period,southern states like Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Kerala, Karnataka & TamilNadu grew at less than 16% in the 2001-11 period. Kerala in fact had the lowestgrowth rate of 4.9% in the 2001-11 period, which is 1/5th of Bihar’s growthrate. If the readjustment was done after every Census, the southern stateswould have lost out on the total Lok Sabha seats for doing better on populationcontrol while the northern states would have benefitted for not controllingpopulation.
Will the readjustment take place
after 2031?
While freezing the readjustment till2026 made sense because of such uneven growth rates, it remains to be seen howthe problem will be solved even after 2026, since the growth rates may not evenout in the near future. It will also be interesting to see how the states thatcontrolled population will be rewarded.


text:
WikiLeaks did not disclose anything about Rahul Gandhi’s marriage & the image is Fake - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 24, 2019
Many Facebook users are sharing a post alleging that WikiLeaks has disclosed that Rahul Gandhi was married to a Columbian and they even have two children aged 14 & 10. Let’s try to analyze the veracity of the claims made in the post.
WikiLeaks disclosed that Rahul Gandhi was married to a Columbian and they even have two children Niyak (14) & Mainak (10)
Fact: WikiLeaks hasn’t disclosed anything regarding Rahul Gandhi’s marriage. The lady with Rahul Gandhi seen in the photo is a Spanish actress Nathalia Ramos. Hence the claim made in the post stands FALSE.
When searched in WikiLeaks.org regarding Rahul Gandhi’s marriage, no relevant information was found. When the photo in the post was cropped and run through Google Reverse Image technique, it was found in a tweet from a Spanish actress, writer and  political scientist, Nathalia Ramos. She tweeted about her meeting with Rahul Gandhi on September 14,2017. Her photo with Rahul Gandhi is now being shared with a false narrative.
Several fake news has been floating on social media regarding Rahul Gandhi right from his filing of nomination for the 2019 general elections.
To sum it up, WikiLeaks hasn’t disclosed anything about Rahul Gandhi’s marriage. It is a fake news.


text:
WikiLeaks has not released the footage of NASA’s moon landing shot in the Nevada Desert. - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 28, 2024
A video allegedly released by WikiLeaks, allegedly showing NASA’s “faked” moon landing shot in the Nevada Desert, is circulating widely on social media platforms. Let’s fact-check this claim through this article.
Claim: WikiLeaks released the footage of moon landing scenes filmed in the Nevada Desert.
Fact: WikiLeaks has not released any such footage. The viral video is an amalgamation of the real footage of NASA’s Apollo moon landing and the behind-the-scenes footage of the Hollywood movie ‘Capricorn One’. Hence, the claim made in the post is False.
To verify the claim, we first searched the WikiLeaks website, as well as their social media handles, to find if they had indeed released any footage related to the moon landing. However, this search did not yield any results.
Continuing our investigation, we critically examined comments on the social media posts sharing the video. Several users identified the footage as behind-the-scenes clips from the movie ‘Capricorn One‘, a 1977 film centered around a faked Mars landing.
Using this information as a lead, we carried out relevant keyword searches on the internet. The search results confirmed that numerous clips in the viral video indeed matched the behind-the-scenes footage of ‘Capricorn One’ available on YouTube.
For instance, a scene from the viral video at the 0:18 timestamp matches the 2:01 timestamp in the ‘Capricorn One’ BTS reel; similarly, footage at 2:40 corresponds with 17:40, 4:01 with 23:50, 4:40 with 37:47, and 5:22 with 41:23 in the BTS reel.
Moreover, the viral video also contains genuine clips from NASA’s Apollo moon landings (e.g., Planting the Flag footage, available here, here, and here). Also, the portion seen at the 0:17 timestamp in the viral video is from the Apollo 11 mission.
Based on these findings, it is evident that the viral video is a fabricated mashup, not an authentic release by WikiLeaks, as claimed.
To sum up, the claim that WikiLeaks released footage of the moon landing recorded in the Nevada Desert is false. The viral video is a mix of real NASA footage and BTS clips from the movie ‘Capricorn One’.

created: February 28, 2024