Retirement fund body EPFO has decided to re-examine its plan to launch online PF withdrawal facility for its subscribers having Aadhaar enabled PF and bank accounts, in the backdrop of apex court ruling. The Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) is cautious after the apex court ruled earlier this month that "the production of an Aadhaar card will not be a condition for obtaining any benefits otherwise due to a citizen". "We are re-examining the proposal of online PF withdrawal facility for subscribers having Aadhaar linked bank and PF accounts. We have sought legal opinion on the issue in the backdrop of latest apex court ruling," EPFO's central provident fund commissioner K K Jalan told PTI. At present, the subscribers who wish to settle their accounts with the EPFO are required to apply manually for withdrawing PF. The body is planning to launch some specialised services for those members who have activated their 'Universal Account Number' and in respect of whom KYC seeding is complete and digitally authenticated. These services include online filing of PF withdrawal claims for all such members whose PF and bank account is seeded with Aadhaar. In all such cases, the claims would have been settled only on submission of a copy of cancelled cheque of Aadhaar enabled bank account of an applicant. It was also planned that the members whose PF and bank accounts are Aadhaar enabled, should be allowed to file their claims directly without the intervention of the employer, through the online portal. The body was also working on the use of ATM network of banks to deliver EPFO services such as balance enquiry, claim transfers and claim withdrawals to all the members whose UAN and bank accounts are Aadhaar enabled. A senior official said that the EPFO has been planning host of services for its subscribers whose UAN and bank account are Aadhaar enabled but now anything could be rolled out only after having proper understanding of apex court ruling on unique identification project. The Supreme Court has said that the UID number "will not be used" by authorities for any purpose "other than the PDS scheme and in particular, for the purpose of distribution of foodgrains, etc and cooking fuel, such as kerosene. The Aadhaar card may also be used for the purpose of the LPG Distribution Scheme." (PTI)
Read More
All app-based taxi services to come under the scheme minus Black & Yellow cabs and those having All India Tourist Permit reports Ashish Sinha May be the Delhi Government will get third time lucky with its constant tune up of policy framework for city taxi services. After having launched two unsuccessful Cab schemes – Radio Taxi Scheme (2006, amended in December 2014) and Economy Taxi Scheme (2010) – the Delhi Government has announced a new “City Taxi Scheme” for all App (mobile application) based taxi companies including Ola and Uber. A detailed policy framework for the new scheme is still awaited, here are the salient features of City Taxi Scheme: Ø All App-based taxi services to come under this one scheme Ø Affordability is centre to City Taxi Scheme Ø The scheme to include small cars like Reva and Nano Ø Permits to be issued to vehicles having engine capacity of 600cc- 749cc too Ø Such Taxis to charge Rs10 per km Ø There will be a cap of 2,500 taxis per operator Ø Mandatory panic buttons and hooters inside all taxies Ø Operators to follow government-decided fare structure Ø Cab companies like Ola, Uber, could float subsidiary firms to align with 2,500 taxies per operator The City Taxi Scheme, experts say, may just provide a lifeline to much discussed App-based cab firms like Ola and Uber who otherwise are staring at an uncertain future because on January 1, the Delhi government had banned the operation of app-based cab services till they complied with the guidelines of the Radio Taxi Scheme of 2006, amended on December 26, 2014. The Delhi HC has once again sought status report from Delhi Police and the state government on why Ola and Uber continue to operate in Delhi despite the ban. The ban imposed by the Delhi Government on January 1, 2015 was upheld by the Delhi High Court earlier this month when it had dismissed a petition filed by Ola who had challenged the ban. In its August 11 order, the Delhi High Court had made it clear that all diesel taxis were barred from making point-to-point metered rides within the capital including the diesel cabs with DLY numbers (registered as tourist vehicles). However, vehicles heading to Gurgaon or Noida would not be prosecuted as the order is applicable only to Delhi. “The new proposal of the Delhi Government allows all cab services to come under a legal framework. It looks like cab services like Ola, Uber, Taxi For Sure, others have limited options,” said a senior executive in a leading consultancy firm looking after the transportation sector. According to Delhi Government’s transport minister Gopal Rai, the older version of the ‘radio taxi’ scheme – under license of which Uber had resumed operations in January – will be merged with the new scheme. “The rules this time have been fine-tuned and improved upon for all taxi service providers. The scheme should be operational soon,” a senior official said. ashish.sinha@businessworld.in
Read More
What is important is that the matter is in contempt and failure to implement the order amounts to willful disobedience of the order of the Supreme Court, writes Payal Chawla Forty years ago, members of the armed forces were promised One Rank-One Pension (OROP). Simply put, OROP means uniform pension to all military personnel retiring at the same rank with same length of service, irrespective of the date of retirement. By way of an example, if two Colonels in the army have put in 25 years of service, one having retired in 1984 and other in 2005, both will be entitled to the same pension and future increases. As opposed to this, armed forces personnel are currently entitled to 50 per cent of the last salary earned (with enhancements made by successive pay commissions). There are strong reasons for the OROP implementation, such as early retirement of armed forces personnel, beginning as early as age 34; lack of post retirement work opportunities, lack of permanency of service. Armed forces personnel are perhaps the only government servants that have no permanency of service, which typically is 60 years for other government servants. With this article, I want to give the reader a perspective on the legal aspects of the OROP and why the demand for the OROP is not only legally justifiable and their claim entirely legitimate, but in fact, their demand, is the law of the land. The claims of the pensioners are squarely covered by the decision of the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of D.S. Nakara v. Union, delivered way back in 1982. In regard to pensions, the Hon’ble Court had observed, “…………………., those who are to retire subsequent to the specified date would feel the pangs in their old age, of lack of adequate security, by what stretch of imagination the same can be denied to those who retired earlier with lower emoluments and yet are exposed to the vagaries of the rising prices and the falling purchasing power of the rupee. And the greater misfortune is that they are becoming older and older compared to those who would be retiring subsequent to the specified date ….… we find no justification for arbitrarily selecting the criteria for eligibility for the benefits of the scheme dividing the pensioners all of whom would be retirees but falling on one or the other side of the specified date”. Despite the fact that Nakara stared us in the face, the OROP was not implemented. Relying on Nakara, the Supreme Court in 2008, in the matter of Union Of India v. SPS Vains (Retd.) held, “…… the submissions advanced on behalf of the Union of India cannot be accepted in view of the decision in D.S. Nakara case. The object sought to be achieved was not to create a class within a class, but to ensure that the benefits of pension were made available to all persons of the same class equally. To hold otherwise would cause violence to the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution...” Sadly, post the judgement, several confusing and contrary circulars were released by the government including as to classification of pensioners. Despite repeated judicial pronouncements in their favour, the successive governments dilly-dallied over the implementation. Seeking their support for votes and then issuing contrary circulars, ostensibly, in the garb of clarifications, forcing army personnel to take to court. So much so, it recently took the Supreme Court, while dismissing an appeal filed by the Union of India, in regard to the Assured Career Progression scheme, to ask the government, to show respect to army personnel and stop dragging them till the Supreme Court on matters. In 2009, a contempt petition was filed in the SPS Vains matter, because the government failed to implement the directions of the Apex Court. Finally, on 16.02.2015, the Court, granted three months’ time to the government, on the government’s request, to finally work out the modalities for implementation of the one rank-one pension ...”. The three months’ period expired on 15.05.2015. The SPS Vains Judgement was re-iterated, just last week, in the matter of A.N. Sachdeva Vs. Maharshi Dayanand University, and the Apex Court observed, “Considering the principles enunciated under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, .. the benefit is not an ex gratia payment but a payment in recognition of past service….”. “Inspite of the Supreme Court having categorically held that there can be no classification based on the date of retirement, the Government refuses to implement the said judgement”, says an anguished Nidhesh Gupta, Senior Advocate, who has represented army personnel in the SPS Vains matter and also acted in the A.N. Sachdeva matter. Successive governments have made poll promises of the implementation of the OROP to defence personnel. In law, the pensioners have a ‘legitimate expectation’ on the basis of the promise made to them. The government ought, therefore, to be estopped from reneging on the promise, on the basis of ‘promissory estoppel’. ‘Legitimate expectation’ and ‘promissory estoppel’ are both well-settled principles of law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the SPS Vains contempt matter observed to the government “This was part of your manifesto for the Lok Sabha elections. You must keep your word”. Despite, poll promises, the implementation has been withheld, ostensibly, on the account of the financial impact on the exchequer, which is likely to be between Rs. 6,000 to Rs. 10,000 crores. Frankly, that didn’t seem an eye-popping figure, particularly in terms of the numbers connected with scandals of venality, we’ve heard in recent times. Be that as it may, legally speaking, for the government to retract from it’s promise, it would need to demonstrate ‘over-riding public interest’. A mere assertion of financial impact on the State cannot be an argument of over-riding public interest. In order to retract from such promise, the government would need to necessarily exhibit the direct co-relation of an adverse impact on the State of such financial expenditure. There are also whispers about the alleged ‘complexity’ in the implementation of the OROP. To me neither of those arguments appear legitimate. A more plausible explanation would be the ‘unwritten’ policy to keep the armed forces financially stricken, with a view to keep them dis-empowered. It is a strategy that has served the nation well, keeping the army at bay, and the control in civilian hands. Even, personnel of the forces will agree, that the example across the border is not an option for India to toy with. But equally, the issue at hand does not relate to armed forces personnel currently in service. We are dealing with post-retirement benefits of veterans, that have no control or possibility of control of government. But then, I am neither an economist, nor an expert on policy. But as a lawyer, here’s what I do know. I know the Supreme Court has ruled and has ruled conclusively in favour of the OROP. I also know that the government did not ask for a review of the judgement. The judgement is the law of the land. The insinuations of the so-called impact on the exchequer and ‘complexities’ are, therefore, only moonshine. What is important is that the matter is in contempt and failure to implement the order amounts to willful disobedience of the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court. Lastly as citizens, it is equally important for us to remember their sacrifice for the nation. They awake so we can sleep. Keeping them financially sequestered is not only inhumane, but the greatest disrespect a nation can show itself. It is a sad day, for any nation, if it’s veteran soldiers have to sit on ‘Dharna’ and on a hunger strike to get their due. No amount of aid, no, not even a billion dollars to Mongolia, will counter the enemy, if the soldiers were ‘striking’ at the border! The author, Payal Chawla is from Juscontractus
Read More
Indian expats in trouble can now get financial help, including for fighting legal cases, under a new scheme announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on August 17 as part of various measures for the welfare of diaspora. "A welfare fund for diaspora is to be set up for their benefit, to help them legally so that they can deal with problems," Modi said while addressing a gathering of over 50,000 Indian expats in the Dubai Cricket Stadium. Modi noted that Indian mission in UAE has set up an e-migrant portal to help Indian migrant workers and an online platform 'MADAD' to assist the diaspora. However, he said that it has come to his notice that there were some technical problems regarding the e-migrant portal. The Prime Minister said he has instructed the Indian embassy in UAE to solve the technical problems faced by the e-migrant portal in one month's time. "I am sure the technical problem will be solved by the embassy," Modi said. Modi said that he will also look into other problems faced by the Indian diaspora like school admissions. "I have told them to increase the number of schools. Let us see, we will take steps to benefit you," Modi said. He also directed the embassy to hold counsellor camps once a month wherever there is a heavy contingent of Indian workers, so that their problems can be resolved. Modi, the first Indian Prime Minister to visit UAE in 34 years, said, "Wherever my Indians are, we never see the colour of the passport, their link with the motherland is enough." He wound up his 70-minute speech by asking the crowd to chant after him "Bharat Mata ki Jai" with raised arms. (PTI)
Read More
Abdul Kalam's 2020 dream is long forgotten. Based on India's history, some feel Digital India will be a political shenanigan, writes Vishal Krishna On the eve of India's 69th Independence Day, BW|Businessworld spoke to a couple of entrepreneurs/startups about the policies of the current government on Startups. The automatic reply was "We do not want to speak about any government because the next one may come and change the policy. They may even blame us for supporting the policies of the previous government. In such a coercive environment, Digital India is not going to be a reality. It has to be sustained for ages beyond political institutions," said the entrepreneurs who did not want to identify themselves. Digital India needs to do several things for it to succeed. It needs to use local language technologies, create transparency in agri-supply chains and government information services, it needs to create clear tax structures, for small retailers and manufacturers, to use technology, and benefit from it. Finally it needs to make India sustainable. Today Digital India is like "Elysium", only certain economically well off citizens have access to all services primarily because of their access to capital and English as their primary language. We at Businessworld are all capitalists. What is the use of capitalism if we as writers ourselves do not have access to information? Imagine the case of 500 million native language speakers and they are waiting to go digital. Will Modi show them the way or will his government make it easier for capitalists to get people to use information and make profits by changing lives? A combination of the two is already happening. Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Jio campaign, Nandan Nilekani's Aadhar project and the Government's will to fund startups are some examples of Digital India. It is a campaign whose foundation has to sustain the weight of India's population and the social extremities that we are used to.
Read More
Black money, these two words became the buzz words for an election-bound BJP, but what has the Narendra Modi government really done to tackle this menace in the last 15 months. Suchetana Ray analyses the issue 'Bring back black money' became a war cry as BJP went into the general elections of 2014. The BJP manifesto proudly announced, “The process of bringing back black money to India what belongs to India, will be put in motion on priority”. It further added that a task force will be created for, “tracking down and bringing back black money stashed in foreign banks and offshore accounts”. It has been almost 15 months since the Narendra Modi government took office but a task force is yet to be created, unless BJP wants to take credit for the SIT created and monitored by the Supreme Court. Within weeks of coming to power, this Government was also forced to toe the UPA line as far as revealing black money holders’ names are concerned. It is perhaps easy to occupy Opposition benches and cry hoarse against government policies but Arun Jaitley soon realised how even he is bound by international treaties from sharing account information of Indians. In the past 15 months, Arun Jailtey has aggressively pushed for the Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets (Imposition of Tax) Bill, for renegotiating Treaties with countries like Mauritius, sending regular emissaries to Switzerland for retrieving information on Indians stashing black money in their “Swiss accounts”. Credit to the finance minister for getting the Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets Bill ready and ratified into an Act. But this Bill popularly known as the Black Money Bill, suffers from several key deficiencies. While the Bill provides for a compliance window to declare unaccounted money and assets abroad, the caveat is, that those under investigation cannot avail of the benefits of this window. But how do you know if you are being investigated, unless the probe is at an advanced stage and a tax notice has been served? Many in the revenue department say that despite the publicity given to this compliance window they are apprehensive about the response to it. The Bill promises not to use information disclosed through this window in its investigations. But do evaders have such faith in the taxman? Many experts have pointed out that this Bill lacks vision, as it does not spell out any mechanism to retrieve information on defaulters. This information will depend on the various tax and banking account information exchange treaties that India has with other countries. Many countries have openly expressed their lack of interest in sharing this information with India; the fear is that the identities of the account holders will find their way into front pages of newspapers. The domestic laws of these countries and international obligations force them to be careful about handing over information, case in point Switzerland. Another controversial point has been the power granted to tax authorities to scrutinize files for past 16 years, a provision that has created huge furore among all and sundry. Shashi Tharoor has criticized this provision saying it recreates the Inspector Raj of the pre-liberalisation days, and some others have warned of the fallout of handing over such unbridled authority to the tax department. The legitimate fear is that this provision can amount to harassment in some cases. While Arun Jaitley managed to stick, albeit superficially, to the BJP Manifesto promise of bringing a law to tackle black money stashed abroad, the bigger menace of illegitimate generation of money within the country remains unaddressed.
Read More
The Narendra Modi’s government’s Pradhan Mantri Jan-Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) has been a resounding success. Aimed to boost financial inclusion, it made it to the Guinness Book of World Records in a short span — about five months after its launch in August 2014. The idea behind is to open bank accounts to get the unbanked in to the formal banking system – to pave the way for the government's ambitious plan to transfer annual subsidy of around Rs 51,029 crore directly to account holders and also plug leakages. Deposits of Rs 21,000 crore have been opened under the PMJDY, the Finance Ministry said on Wednesday. The good news is that zero-balance accounts under the scheme have reduced to 46.93 per cent to July 2015 from 76 per cent from September 2014. That’s a big positive as one of the criticisms was that there was hardly any monies in these accounts – that it was merely a statistical entry. On Tuesdsay, North Block said officials from the Ministry of Petroleum, Ministry of Rural Development also join in to sort out the issues with banks with regard to Direct Benefit Transfer ( DBT) schemes implemented by them.
Read More
Sandeep Bamzai says The single biggest takeaway of the new Modi Government was that corruption had been consigned the rubbish heapAn almost visceral hatred for one another has debilitated the Indian parliament in an unprecedented manner imperilling reforms and leaving the public at large confounded. To build a better world, you have to tear down the old. And this is what one thought would happen once the new BJP under Narender Modi's leadership virtually seized power in May 2014 decimating the Congress, Samajwadi Party, Bhaujan Samaj Party, Left, RJD, JD U and others. Only some regional chieftains held sway in their areas of influence - Mamata Banerjee, Jayalalitha, Naveen Patnaik, Shiv Sena, TDP and TRS. Modi had promised much, his playbook enlarging with each big rally. Hope was up as he was sworn in. Some of us in media realised that it wasn't going to be easy for his administration short on hands on experience would take time to untie the knots left behind by the previous dispensation which had grown roots over the decade it ruled. Sandeep BamzaiAs months passed by and one spoke to ministers and bureaucrats, it appeared that untangling the knots left behind was taking too much time be it in petroleum or finance or power or coal or highways or railways and other economic ministries. The new year came around and hope continued to float. Then a year in office was completed and there was a sense of ennui and even lassitude. Foreign policy or international diplomacy and security issues aside, the government appeared to be unsure as to what it wanted. It appeared directionless laying too much emphasis on parliamentary legislation to undertake reforms. On May 26, the uncharitable even went onto say that the UPA had completed 11 years in office. The single biggest takeaway of the new Modi Government was that corruption had been consigned the rubbish heap and notwithstanding what the Congress says about Lalitgate, there is no like to like instance of gargantuan corruption scams like say 2G spectrum, coalgate or CWG. I agree that Vyapam is a scandal with myriad mysterious deaths which needed to be investigated thoroughly and the monetary transactions between Lalit Modi and Vasundra Raje's son Dushyant appear prima facie dubious and require probe, but nothing conclusive on the lines of a quid pro quo has been proved in Sushma Swaraj's case. But the revitalised Congress encircled the BJP and its foreign minister to make sure that parliament simply didn't function. The breakdown in relations between treasury and opposition led in the main by the Congress has been a cause for concern because it has led to a dysfunctionality never seen before. It emanates from the dislike that Modi has for the first family which is mutually shared by them for him resulting in a deadlock. Floor and party managers from the BJP have failed abysmally to break the gridlock and the Congress has taken a virulent stand against Modi and his Government. Something not quite seen in Indian polity. Who do you blame? The Congress would be the obvious whipping boys for they have led the disruptions over Sushma's alleged corruption which cannot be equated to what transpired during the lost decade under the Congress. Equally I think the BJP is to blame for not trying to send out feelers to break the ranks of the opposition. But the time it did with Mulayam Singh Yadav it was too late. IN any case, the SP has no muscle in the 15th Lok Sabha being reduced to tatters with five MPs. Further the BJP's narrow-minded obsession to focus on the land bill and GST and use the instrumentality of legislation to get unpalatable reform out of the way was poor strategic thinking. Unfortunately the same BJP led by the same Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj in the upper and lower houses had signed off on the draconian land bill - Sonia's pet bill on January 1, 2014. My question is when you knew that it would deindustrialise India and make land acquisition practically impossible, why did you sign off on it. Incidentally, by January 2014, the winds of change were already blowing in India, a resurgent BJP under Modi had registered more than emphatic victories in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh and done well in Delhi. Yet you chose in a sign of bipartisanship to back the land bill. GST was a Congress reform which the Congress was refusing to go through now because it believed that impeding the BJP on anything and everything was vital. It was a piquant situation for the ruling party which suddenly appeared bereft of ideas and inertia ridden, its complete dependence on parliamentary legislation seeing it vanquished at the gates. Fifteen months after storming to power, the BJP seems to be befuddled and confused despite having 280 members of its own in the Lok Sabha. Baulked by the tyranny of numbers in the Rajya Sabha, it is leaden footed and maladroit. On the day of the adjournment motion when Sushma Swaraj tore into the Congress first family and after Rahul gandhi had with great bravado and derring do attacked Modi and Sushma, the PM himself chose not to sit in the house even though he was present in his parliamentary office. India meanwhile suffers, it awaits its tryst with radical reform, something which the BJP promised. It awaits its tryst with development and growth. It follows an effusive and middling path, not taking on the Congress and calling its bluff. It needed a Super charged Sushma to tear into the Congress and its hypocrites. As we stand on the cusp of yet another Independence Day, an embattled Modi and his Government seem intellectually incapable of navigating their way to shore. Needless controversies and a catalogue of them to boot have incapacitated the Government which now needs to use its executive decision making authority to emerge from this rubbish heap. India awaits a Modi who goes beyond sloganeering and event management, it awaits a visionary Modi brimming with ideas executing his plans despite being constricted with a limited gene pool of his council of ministers. It awaits the Modi who promised so much and delivered so little. It awaits the Modi who one thought would be transformative. Clock's ticking, but you still have four years to redeem yourself.
Read More
Neeraj Thakur says the government needs to understand that any policy that seeks to control pollution should be direct and without any kind of subsidy, especially involving car manufacturersShould the government give a subsidy to people to surrender their old-vehicles? While we all know that to tackle increasing pollution in the country, we need to retire older vehicles, the idea of government subsidising the scheme is nonsense. Subsidies are supposed to be given to the poor and not to the rich. If the government gives subsidy to a private car owner for retiring his car -- which he anyway is supposed to -- if it does not meet the environment norms, it would be a sheer waste of government money. The Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers itself has said that there is no data in the country that can certify the number of old vehicles plying on the road. The exercise to identify such vehicles itself would be time consuming and arbitrary. While the media reports quoted transport minister Nitin Gadkari incentivising people to surrender their old vehicles, the plan revealed by him looks more in favour of the auto car manufacturers who are supposed to get tax benefits from the government which are to be passed on to the customers who buy new cars from them. The government needs to understand that any policy that seeks to control pollution should be direct and without any kind of subsidy, especially involving car manufacturers. The policy of having a pollution control certificate for all vehicles in the country has not delivered desired results, whereas, if implemented with rigour, it could have freed the country from poisonous emissions from vehicles to a great extent. Moreover, the best way to retire such vehicles would be to introduce standard pollution norms wherbey all the polluting old vehicles could be retired in a window of 2-5 years without any kind of government subsidy. And in case, the government is looking at increasing the index for industrial production by way of such scheme, it should rather provide interest subvention to the car makers directly. Asking people to leave their LPG cylinders to reduce government’s subsidy budget and then paying that money to vehicle owners is a proposal devoid of logic in the context of the Indian economy.
Read More
Union Minister of State for Power Piyush Goyal on Friday (14 August) conceded that there is slim possibility of implementation of GST law by April 2016 deadline, but said the government will work out alternatives to implement it so that people derive its benefits. Accusing the Congress of "insulting the people of the country" by disrupting the legislative business in the just-concluded Parliament session where GST bill was stalled, the Minister said they are doing this to create a perception that the Modi government is not working. "There are less possibilities of implementing Goods and Service Tax (GST) law by April 2016, but the government will work out alternative ways to ensure people get its benefits," Goyal said in response to a specific query if the government can implement it by the April 2016 deadline. "We will hope that the Congress will realise the futility of stalling reforms like GST and will come on board." However, he refrained from spelling out alternative ways, saying the Finance Minister (Arun Jaitley) will "think over it and come out with an alternative at an appropriate time". He ruled out Ordinance route for GST, saying constitutional amendments cannot be implemented by Ordinances. Yesterday, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had asserted that the NDA government is determined to stick to the rollout deadline for GST. "I will not reveal the strategy, but I would clearly say we are determined and it would be our endeavour to roll out GST from April 1, 2016," Jaitley had said yesterday. Goyal, who was in town as part of BJP's strategy to 'expose' the Congress all over the country for stalling Parliament, said, "The Congress has not only insulted Parliament, but also the people of this country." He added: "People of this country had given absolute majority to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government and reduced the Congress to just 44 in the last Lok Sabha elections. However, by misusing the Parliamentary process, the Congress has stalled important legislative business." Referring to the Congress again, he said the government under Narendra Modi has started to bring about structural changes in the country, but they want to stall the progress of the country. (PTI)
Read More
