Staff Reporter

Shillong, Jan 21: The state BJP has stated today that the invitation to visit Ram Temple was as per convenience and not for inauguration. 

In a statement, the BJP said a recent news article seems to suggest that some political and religious leaders of Meghalaya have “skipped” the Shree Ram Temple invitation which was extended by the state BJP (not the PM as wrongly reported).

“State BJP makes it clear that the invitation was for visiting the newly constructed Shree Ram Temple, as per the invitees’ convenience, and not for the inauguration per se as no date was mentioned. It is important to note that the invites were readily accepted whole heartedly. Moreover the inauguration event has been advance blessed by every prominent citizen of the state,” it said. 

The statement said all BJP Chief Ministers, Union Ministers, State Ministers and all leaders of the party and karyakartas have been directed to witness the historic and Revered event LIVE from places of worship in their respective areas on the 22nd of January 2024. 

Everyone will visit the Shree Ram Temple at a later date of their own choice, the same holds true for Meghalaya as well.

“BJP Meghalaya is of the opinion that such reporting, as has been carried out by one newspaper, is an attempt to vitiate the atmosphere during a momentous occasion and an effort to distort facts. The newly constructed Shree Ram Temple at Ayodhya has an ancient significance and holds a special place in the consciousness of a vast majority of Indians. Such an article is an attempt to paint a picture that Meghalaya doesn’t subscribe to the sentiments of a certain community and is separate from rest of the country. This is particularly sad considering people of various faiths and myriad cultures have always resided in the state in harmony, enjoying each other’s company. BJP Meghalaya fervently appeals that such biased reporting be stopped immediately,” it said.

Staff Reporter

Shillong, April 5: The Voice of the People Party (VPP) has decided to submit a petition to Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma and Assembly Speaker Thomas A Sangma to convene a special session of the Assembly to discuss the matter pertaining to the issue of implementation of the roster system and the state job reservation policy.

The decision was taken at a meeting of the party’s central executive committee after the order passed by the Meghalaya High Court that the decision for a cut-off date or how far back the roster system would be made applicable was left at the discussion of the State Assembly.

ALSO READ: KSU for prospective implementation of roster system

Also, the Party in such meetings will elucidate the importance of creating resistance against the attempt to impose a one-language policy in the country marked by diversity and also on the criticality of inclusion of the Khasi and Garo languages in the Eight Schedule of the Constitution of India, he said.

Meanwhile, the VPP appealed to the citizens to attend public meetings. The dates of the public meetings will be announced at a later date.

New Delhi, March 1 (IANS) The Supreme Court will deliver judgment on Thursday on a batch of petitions seeking a collegium-like system for the appointment of Election Commissioners (ECs) and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC).

A constitution bench, headed by Justice K.M. Joseph and comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, and C.T. Ravikumar had reserved judgment in the matter on November 24, 2022. According to the cause list, two judgments, each by Justices Joseph and Rastogi, will be pronounced at 10.30 a.m. on Thursday in the matter.

During the arguments, Attorney General R. Venkataramani had told the Supreme Court that if it were to begin to doubt every step taken by the government in the process of appointment of the Election Commissioner, then it has implications on the integrity and independenceA of the institution.

The five-judge constitution bench, headed by Justice Joseph, had then shot a volley of questions at the country’s top law officer in connection with the appointment of Election Commissioner Arun Goel. It posed some critical questions to the AG in connection with Goel’s appointment: what deliberation could have been done to finalise his name within 24 hours, same-day clearance, same day process completed, and the appointment was made not even in 24 hours.

The Centre had, however, maintained that there is no trigger point for the Supreme Court to interfere in the appointment process of the Election Commissioner.

After hearing detailed arguments, the Supreme Court reserved the judgment on a batch of petitions seeking a collegium-like system for the appointment of the ECs and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC).

During the hearing, the Supreme Court had told the Centre that it wants to see the files relating to the recent appointment of Goel as the Election Commissioner and emphasised that it wants to see by what mechanism, “he was picked up”, and “there is no danger to produce it (files)”.