In Mamata Banerjee's WB, HC asks why not impose more taxes to hold fair polls
- We condemn the flogging of Dalit men in Gujarat, says Rajnath Singh
- India cannot suppress voice of Kashmiris, should hold plebiscite: Nawaz Sharif
- Hockey legend Mohammed Shahid passes away
- Ambiguity on Navjot Singh Sidhu's status in BJP as no official word on resignation from party
- 7th Pay Commission: Govt to examine pay parity between IAS, non-IAS officers
The Calcutta High Court today asked the Mamata Banerjee-led West Bengal government why it should not impose taxes for holding free, fair and peaceful elections in the state if it was suffering from a funds crunch.
"Why are taxes not imposed for holding elections if it has a funds crunch?" Justice Biswanath Somadder asked state Advocate General Bimal Chatterjee while hearing a petition by the State Election Commission against the state government over holding of the panchayat elections.
"Every day in the newspapers there is talk of new taxes, so why not taxes for holding elections?" Justice Somadder asked and directed the state to come up with a reply at a later date.
Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had yesterday announced imposition of new taxes to set up a Rs 500 crore relief fund for investors allegedly duped by the Saradha group.
When the AG submitted that it was common knowledge that the state had a resource crunch, Justice Somadder observed "if the resource or lack of resource can hinder holding of free, fair and peaceful elections, why not impose taxes on citizens as it is in their interest that free and fair elections are held."
Countering SEC counsel Samaraditya Pal's submission that 800 companies of central paramilitary forces were necessary for holding the panchayat elections in a free, fair and peaceful manner, Chatterjee stated "The state election commission should have taken into account the ground realities while asking for 800 companies of armed forces."
Asking why the SEC was seeking 800 companies and not more or less, the AG submitted that in correspondence with the state, the SEC could not give justification for the demand, but stuck to the figure of 800 companies claiming primacy.
He also submitted that the state government had already provided Rs 100 crore of the Rs 209 crore asked by the SEC for holding the panchayat elections in the state.
- UN faces a crisis, but its new secretary general is unlikely to upset tradition
- South China Sea verdict has changed the ground rules for future engagement with China
- Empowering women through JAM
- Resolution of citizen grievances is an indicator of the performance of government departments
- Telescope: Grace and the lack of it
- The endeavour for a common civil law must be to end discrimination, and not stamp majority might