24.8% of sanctioned posts in the country's police force vacant as on January 1, 2013, says the Union Home Ministry

The Union Government on Tuesday informed the Lok Sabha that there is a 24.8 per cent vacancy against the sanctioned posts in the country's police forces, including both state and Centre, as per the latest records compiled in this regard till 2013.

 

"As per data compiled by the Bureau of Police Research and Development, as on January 1, 2013, against total sanctioned strength of 22,09,027 posts of police personnel in all the states and Union Territories, 16,60,666 personnel were in position leading to a shortfall of 5,48,361 personnel, which is about 24.8 per cent of the sanctioned posts," Minister of State for Home Haribhai Parathibai Chaudhary said in a written reply to Lok Sabha.

He added that as of the same date, the "sanctioned and actual strength of police personnel at all India level per one lakh population in India is 181.47 and 136.42 respectively. The police-population ration has shown wide variations across the country. Sparsely populated states such as Tripura, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram among others have the maximum police-population ratio as compared to the national average of 181 police personnel per lakh of population. 

Lok Sabha passes Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Amendment Bill, 2014

The Lok Sabha on 15 December 2014 passed the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Amendment Bill, 2014, which seeks to amend the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.  The Act provides for the speedy eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises, including those of government companies and corporations. 

  Salient Provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Amendment Bill, 2014

The Bill proposes to make suitable amendments in Sections 2, 4, 5, 7 and 9 of the 1971 Act.

The Bill redefines public premises to include companies in which at least 51 percent of the paid-up share capital is held by Central and state governments.

The Bill seeks to bring the properties of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation and other Metro Rails which may come up in future and also the properties of New Delhi Municipal Council within the ambit of the 1971 Act.

The Act outlines the process that must be followed by Estate Officers in determining whether the premises are in unauthorised occupation.  The Bill outlines time limits for certain actions to be followed while evicting unauthorised occupants:  

If the Estate Officer is satisfied that premises are in unauthorised occupation, he may order the eviction of the premises.  This should be done within 15 days from the order.  The 15 day period may be extended if the Estate Officer feels there are compelling reasons which prevent a person from vacating the premises in 15 days. 

If an Estate Officer receives information that a person is in unauthorised occupation of the premises, he must make an order, within seven days of receiving this information, directing persons who have occupied the premises to show cause as to why they should not be evicted.  However, any delay in issuing this order will not invalidate proceedings.

When a person is in arrears of rent payable, the Estate Officer may order that he pay rent or damages, after issuing a notice asking the person to explain why such as order should not be made.  The explanation must be provided within seven days of the notice.  

The Act states that every appeal to the Estate Officer’s orders must be disposed off as quickly as possible.  The Bill states that appeals must be disposed off within one month, as far as possible.

The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 was enacted to provide for speedy machinery for the eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises. The Act has been amended previously in 1980, 1984 and 1994.

The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 was enacted to provide for speedy machinery for the eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises. The Act has been amended previously in 1980, 1984 and 1994. 

Law to prevent 'honour killings' : difficult to fix a timeline as consultations with stakeholders needed: Union Law Minister D.V. Sadananda Gowda

As many as 22 states and Union Territories have supported a Law Commission recommendation to bring a bill to prevent 'honour killings', but the Union Government on Thursday refused to fix a timeline to put in place a legal framework, saying a decision will be taken after due consultations.    A decision on introducing a legislation to prevent honour killings will be taken only after due consultations, said the Union Law Minister Union Law Minister Mr. D.V. Sadananda Gowda informed the Lok Sabha on Thursday that the policy decision to enact a legislation on the issue will be taken after considering the comments of all states and holding consultations with the stakeholders. "In view of the above, it would be difficult to fix a timeline in this regard," he said. The Law Commission’s report on 'prevention of interference with freedom of matrimonial alliances (in the name of honour and tradition)' was circulated to states for their comments.

"Till date, 22 state governments and Union Territories have sent their responses and are in support of the recommendations made by the Law Commission," he said in a written response. The response of other states are awaited and reminders have been issued to them. Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, UP, West Bengal and UTs of Chandigarh, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu, Lakshadweep and Pudducherry have supported the proposal to bring in a legal framework to prevent honour killings. The Law Minister said as the subject of the report falls in the Concurrent List of the Constitution, consultation with states is necessary. In its 2001 report, the panel, then headed by Justice P V Redi, had recommended brining a Bill "to provide for, in the interests of protecting individual liberty and preventing victimisation, prohibition of unlawful assemblies and other conduct interfering with the freedom of matrimonial alliances in the name of honour and tradition and for the matters connected therewith or incidental thereto." The draft legislation was named 'The Prohibition of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances Bill'. The report had referred to a Supreme Court decision "wherein a direction of far-reaching consequences has been given while laying down the proposition that the so-called honour killing comes within the category of rarest of the rare cases deserving death punishment.”

Penalty imposed on Telecom operators for non-compliance of customer verification guidelines, says Union Minister for Communications and IT,Ravi Shankar Prasad

Union Minister for Communications and IT, Ravi Shankar Prasad in a written reply to the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, said that a total of Rs. 2,179.41 crore was imposed on various telecom operators till September 30, 2014 for violation of customer verification guidelines. 

The maximum penalty was imposed on Aircel (Rs. 486.48 crore) followed by Reliance (Rs. 454.62 crore), BSNL (Rs.329.14 crore), Airtel (Rs. 309.87 crore), Vodafone (Rs.211.85 crore), Idea Cellular (Rs. 123. 44 crore), Tata (Rs. 172.80 crore), Sistema Shyam Teleservices (Rs. 52.31 crore), Uninor (Rs.11.17 crore), MTNL (Rs. 11.17 crore) and STel (Rs. 10.92 crore)

Mr. Prasad added that the Department had found from the audit of customer application forms (CAF) that only about 4% of CAF were non-compliant with the subscriber verification guidelines during 2013-2014. The reasons for non-compliance include missing CAF’s, missing photo/proof of identity/proof of address on CAF, bulk connections issued to an individual or a company or an organization.