Hang corrupt, fumes Supreme Court; 1931 survey to remain basis for OBC quota?  India, Argentina have extradition pact of prior to 1947, says Advani. Q issue is old, go a head UP Election? Sonia Gandhi said his because she knows Q and her best relation with the Swiss authorities. So nothing would happen. Moving stick in the wind can’t give result.

 

Treaty between India and Argentina of prior to 1947 is not acceptable to UPA government. But UPA is determined to give reservation to OBC on the basis of censor of 1931. Why this discrimination? Why this racism?

An Argentine court is to take up India's request for extradition of Bofors payoff accused Ottavio Quattrochi. Meanwhile, CNN-IBN's Sumon Chakrabarti has traced the hotel where Quattrocchi has been staying since the day he was granted bail.

Should the elements that save ‘Q’ be publicly hanged?

The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the only panacea to rid the country of corrupt elements was to hang a few of them on the lamp post. "The only way to rid the country of corruption is to hang a few of you on the lamp post. The law does not permit us to do it but otherwise we would prefer to hang people like you at the lamp post," a bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and Markandeya Katju remarked during arguments put forth by counsel for an accused.

 

Lying government to save Quattrocchi

"An extradition treaty was signed by the British government (before India's independence) with Argentina, which still survives," former Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani told a news conference on Feb 26. His comments came in the wake of External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee's remarks that India would hold talks with Argentina for extradition of Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi because both countries have no extradition pact.

 

1931 survey to remain basis for OBC quota?

In a development that holds ominous portends for the Manmohan Singh government’s quota plans, the Supreme Court on March 7 asked the Centre as to how a 75-year old sample survey, covering a few villages and a minuscule percentage of the population, could be the basis for determining backwardness of OBCs and providing 27% reservation.

 

“What was the hurry in providing reservation without collecting authentic and determinable data? Why didn’t you (the government) wait to gather the data first and then come out with such reservation?” asked a division bench comprising Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice L S Panta.

 

The Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and L S Panta also wanted to know why the Centre had not excluded the creamy layer among the other backward classes from the purview of 27% reservation in central educational institutions like IITs and IIMs. "How did you quantify the social and educational backwardness of OBCs as a class and not as castes as in SCs? Until and unless a full determination of these indicators is done, how could this Act be given effect to," the Bench asked.

 

The Counsels for the petitioners said that the parliamentary standing committee attached to the HRD ministry too had favoured a fresh survey to determine the backwardness of various sections of the society. The proposal was, however, stonewalled by the Centre.
 

Pleading for an interim stay on the Central Educational Institutions (Reservations in Admission) Act, 2006, counsels for student bodies Fail S. Nariman and P.P. Rao contended that the government has enacted the law merely to garner political mileage.

 

Nariman said that, "the government has absolutely no identifiable caste data" to justify its step to provide 27.5 percent reservation in educational institutions to SEBC or Other Backward Classes (OBC) students.

 

He pointed out to the bench that the government has sought to provide 27.5 percent reservations on the basis of the last caste-based census conducted in 1931, which has no relevance in 2007.

He contended that in the absence of any relevant caste-based data, no reservation could be provided, as it would run the risk of missing the targeted population.

On a suggestion by the bench if the government should be allowed to implement the law after excluding the creamy layer among the OBCs, Nariman said that, "that modality too would be as vague as the law itself" in the absence of any valid caste figures to identify the targeted beneficiaries.

 

Nariman and Rao challenged the Mandal Commission's finding, which put the percentage population of other backward classes in India at 52, saying that these figures are not reliable.

 

The Supreme Court Wednesday reserved its verdict on a plea for an interim stay during the academic session 2007-08 on the latest law reserving 27.5 percent seats for backward class students in higher educational institutions.

A bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat and L.S Panta reserved the verdict after hearing arguments for 150 minutes for and against the plea for interim stay on the law during the upcoming academic session.

 

While reserving the judgment, the bench also directed counsels for various students' bodies, including the Youth for Equality, seeking an interim stay on the law, to file their remaining arguments in written form by March 12.

The judgment in the case is expected to be out in around 10 days, barely a fortnight before the UP elections.