Featured Articles

Century Workers' Struggle - Five Years

सेंचुरी श्रमिक संघर्ष के 5 वर्ष । 5 Years of the #Century #Labor #Struggle
Bahujan Sanvad
Oct 18, 2022 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz4Ga-VcUFc  live at 6 pm 18th Oct 2022
5 साल पहले यानी कि 17 अक्टूबर 2017 को बिरला मैनेजमेंट के द्वारा सेंचुरी मिल को अवैध तरीके से दो-दो बार फर्जी बिक्री कर बंद कर दिया गया था। न मजदूरों की सहमति ली गई थ और न ही राज्य सरकार से अनुमति ली गई थी। इतना बड़ा भ्रष्टाचार जिस पर सरकार और प्रशासन मौन है। यह आजादी के अमृत महोत्सव की एक तस्वीर सेंचुरी आंदोलन है।
1000 से ज्यादा मजदूर बेरोजगार हुए, और तब से लेकर आज दिनांक 18 अक्टूबर 2022 तक अहिंसा, त्याग, समर्पण का चुनौतीपूर्ण संघर्ष सत्याग्रह रोजगार आंदोलन के रूप में अभी निरंतर भी जारी है।

Struggle of the Century https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQADySVmXrU Durgash Khavse put their agitation in perspective.. a development story, where basic land of farmers and tribal is taken for factory projects, and when the market does it cycle, the land finds new uses, and workers get abandoned even by the Unions.. Narmada Bachao Andolan has spoken about the Development model.. Vikas Chahiye, Vinash Nahi.

This Century & The Workers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mK3gILQtF-Y Nov 21, 2020
The story of the Centyry Satyagraha Andolan, goes on as the Lockdown sees more and more Laws being changed just to make it easier for a certain type of economy, where stack holder value rather than social goods and livelihood decide if a factory should be closed and capital moved to more business friendly regimes.. apparently labour laws are outdated because investment will not come our way...

Split verdict: Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim

Why it leaves me, a Left-Liberal, at odds with me, a Progressive Muslim  Javed Anand https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/supreme-court-verdict-on-hijab-split-wide-open-8207010/

Justice Dhulia noted the main thrust of his judgment was that the entire concept of essential religious practice was not essential to the dispute. The high court took a wrong path. According to him, it is ultimately a matter of choice and Articles 14 and 19. “The foremost question in my mind was the education of the girl child. Are we making her life any better?” He also held the view that the judgment in the Bijoe Emmanuel case “squarely covers the issue”. This refers to the 1986 ruling of the apex court that upheld the fundamental right of three school-going children from the Jehovah’s Witness sect to stand respectfully but not join others in singing the national anthem during the school assembly as it conflicted with the tenets of their faith. ..

The Liberal Me has no doubt that Justice Dhulia’s views are in consonance with constitutional values. But the Progressive Muslim Me fears that were a larger bench to subsequently rule accordingly, it would effectively strengthen the regressive sections among Indian Muslims...As is public knowledge, cutting across sectarian divides — Sunni, Shia, Barelvi, Deobandi, Wahhabi, Salafi, Maududian — virtually the entire Muslim clergy in India is of the view that hijab (niqab, burqa) is mandatory in Islam. The abstract principle of a woman’s freedom to choose, I fear, will feed into the it-is-mandatory argument; act as convenient cover for Islam’s patriarchs to keep, even push, women behind the veil...

Two, do Muslim girls studying in Muslim-run schools, 3-year-olds included, have the right to choose or they simply must conform?

In the event that the March order of the Karnataka High Court is struck down by a larger bench of the Supreme Court in the coming period, we might ponder on what students committed to Hindutva politics will make of the right to choose verdict. Classrooms becoming the new arena for competitive communalism? Muslim girls in hijab, Hindu boys in saffron scarves? Diversity, anyone?

Hijab Judgment of Supreme Court | सर्वोच्च न्यायालय का हिजाब पर फ़ैसला | Faizan Mustafa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83qGIZE0z70
Oct 14, 2022 Some comments on Youtube: Matir Manush We thank Dr. Faizan Mustafa as usual for his dedication to explain the matter of law to us with commitment and devotion. Justice Gupta expressed his opinion on the practice of Hijab with sincere reasoning. But we believe he failed to realize a simple matter.
Wearing Hijab is not harming or hurting anybody. It is not even disrupting the uniformity in the education places. But banning hijab is surely damaging one's freedom of personal choice. Banning hijab is shattering one's dream of education.
..justice Dhulia's verdict protect the integrity of our constitution. His judgement promotes the right of education of the girls. In other words the judgement of justice Dhulia is helping our girls to acquire knowledge which is very important for the nation. Our girls are a vulnerable group of people in the country. The judicial system should not and must not increase their vulnerability.

Rohit gupta New doctrines are laid down like trust doctrine, cross obligations and tolerance, laying down new dimensions of constitutional interpretation.
The question is of acoustomed to other way of living and there are countries, who have no school dress

Yazdy Palia I disagree with the line of reasoning. In their enthusiasm, the petitioner, the respondent and the judges, have not realised, that, the only issue in this case is
1. Does an institution, in India, has the right to frame their own rules?
2. Do the students and their supporters, have the right to impose their will on the institution created by individuals to educate children? It appears that all the three are competing with each other to violate fundamental rights.

'Right to Work: Feasible and Indispensable for India to be a truly Civilized and Democratic Nation'

India needs Rs 13.52 lakh cr annual investment to create full employment: Study https://www.businesstoday.in/jobs/story/india-needs-rs-1352-lakh-cr-annual-investment-to-create-full-employment-study-349576-2022-10-11  

creating employment for 21.8 crore people needs investment of Rs 13.52 lakh crore per annum or 5 per of the GDP (gross domestic product). Increasing employment will result in greater production as well as demand, it suggested.

Shortage of resources for achieving full employment is an invalid argument since it can be self-financing, the report said, adding that this runs counter to the elite perception that full employment would be a negative sum game for them.

New technology being evolved in the advanced countries is appropriate for their needs but not necessarily good for a developing country like India, the report noted.

Higher technology is supposed to lead to higher profitability of a company. But it also lowers the employment potential. So, those who import technology and reduce employment need to pay a tax which could be used to finance employment, it suggested.

Executive Summary of Employment Report: 'Right to Work: Feasible and Indispensable for India to be a truly Civilized and Democratic Nation' https://1drv.ms/b/s!AiXYIRE1zsiagYVSHaDvaz5Tz0UfAA?e=1BmRrq

Read more …