After imposing a cost of Rs 25,000, the Delhi High Court restored complaint filed by the central bank and asked the bank to deposit with the PM Cares Fund.

New Delhi [India], July 12 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Tuesday slammed the Centre for filing a one-page reply to a petition seeking the declaration of the PM CARES Fund as 'The State' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

“This is such an important issue and only one page affidavit filed. There is not even a whisper about anything in this reply,” bench said. In a plea seeking a declaration that PM CARES Fund is “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday directed... The post appeared first on .

New Delhi [India], May 26 (ANI): Musician Hridaynath Mangeshkar on Thursday decided to donate Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Lata Deenanath Mangeshkar Award cash prize to PM Cares Fund.

New Delhi Apr 26 PTI Cosy arrangements cannot be allowed under the law and the PM CARES Fund must either submit to the rigours of the Constitution or not publicise itself as State the Delhi High Court was told on TuesdayThe submission was made before a bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla which was hearing a petition filed by Samyak Gangwal seeking to declare the PM CARES Fund a State under the ConstitutionThe Centre urged the court to defer the hearing on the petition as Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the petitioner was ambushing and questioned the source behind the pleaThe bench said it would accommodate the Centre and heard the senior counsel appearing for the petitioner before listing the case for the governments submissions on July 12On an affidavit filed by an undersecretary at the Prime Ministers Office PMO who is discharging his functions in the PM Cares Trust on an honorary basis the Centre has said the PM CARES Fund is not a government fund as donations to it do not go to the Consolidated Fund of India and no third-party information can be parted with irrespective of its status under the Constitution and the Right to Information RTI ActAppearing for the petitioner senior advocate Shyam Divan argued that nobody can contract out of law for the creation of a fund that receives public donations and has senior ministers as its ex-officio membersThe public has the right to know and the PM CARES fund must be governed by the principles of good governance transparency and accountability Divan saidWe do not know who is donating Transparency is essential to constitutional fabric he addedDivan said even though the cause and purpose behind the fund is laudable the law does not allow setting up a parallel entity that is outside the scope of the Comptroller and Auditor General CAGCan you have the speaker of the house and some members creating a trust and saying please donate Please assume that the cause is extremely laudable but does the Constitution allow you to set up something parallel and say this is not subject to any rigour of State and the CAG does not apply he askedDivan further submitted that if the respondents contend that the PM CARES Fund is State it cannot use the state emblem or use the official govin domain for its websiteEither you are State and submit to the rigours of the Constitution or do not publicise that you are State he saidCan we under the Constitution allow these cosy arrangements Not suggesting that any action is mala fide but the structure is legally obnoxious the senior advocate submittedThe petitioner has filed two petitions seeking a direction to declare the PM CARES Fund a State under the Constitution to ensure transparency in its functioning and also to declare it a public authority under the RTI ActThe petitioner has said the PM CARES Fund is a State as it was formed by the prime minister on March 27 2020 to extend assistance to the citizens of the country in the wake of a public health emergency -- the COVID-19 pandemic -- and if it is found otherwise the usage of the domain name gov the prime ministers photograph the state emblem etc has to be stoppedThe petitioner has said the trustees of the fund are the prime minister the defence minister the home minister and the finance minister and immediately after the formation of the fund the Centre through its functionaries represented that the fund was set up and operated by the Government of IndiaTo ensure transparency and accountability the plea has sought a direction for periodic auditing of the PM CARES website and a disclosure of the details of the donations received by itIn his alterative prayers the petitioner has sought a direction to the Centre to publicise that the PM CARES Fund is not a fund of the Government of India and to restrain PM CARES from using Prime Minister of India or Prime Minister including its abbreviations in its name on its website the trust deed and other official or unofficial communications and advertisementsIn its affidavit the Centre has said the PM CARES trust functions with transparency and its funds are audited by an auditor -- a chartered accountant drawn from the panel prepared by the CAGIt has vehemently contended that irrespective of the status of the Prime Ministers Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund PM CARES Fund under the Constitution and the RTI Act it is not permissible to disclose third-party informationIt has said the trust receives all donations via online payments cheques or demand drafts and the amount received is audited with the audited report and the expenditure of the trust fund displayed on the websiteThe officer who filed the affidavit has also said he was discharging his functions in the PM CARES Trust on an honorary basis and it was a charitable trust not created by or under the Constitution or by any law made by Parliament or a state legislature PTI ADS RC

New Delhi Mar 25 PTI The Supreme Court Friday refused to entertain a plea seeking a direction to the Centre to disclose accounts activity and expenditure details of the PM-CARES Fund and make it open for audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India CAGA bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai asked the petitioner to approach the Allahabad high court and file a review petition in the matter Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat appearing for the petitioner submitted that the ambit of relief sought is totally different and validity and disclosure of PM-CARES Fund was soughtHe said the High Court dismissed the petition relying on CPIL judgment of the top court and stated that the High Court was not correct in relying solely on the judgmentThe bench said You might be right in saying that all issues were not considered We dont know if you had argued You go and file a review Let us have the benefit of thatPetitioner referred to relief claimed in petition and submitted that points have not been dealt with by the High Court while dismissing Only ground was that this is covered by CPIL judgment Senior counsel seeks permission to withdraw SLP to go and argue in HC these other grounds Granted Permitted as withdrawn Petitioner at Liberty to approach this court later if aggrievedThe appeal filed by advocate Divya Pal Singh challenged the Allahabad High Courts judgement dated August 31 2020Singh alleged that unimaginable and unfathomable amounts of public money is pumped unabatedly everyday into the coffers of the FundThe High Court had dismissed the PIL relying on the apex courts decision of August 18 2020 which refused a plea by NGO CPIL for the CAG audit of PM-CARES FundThe top court had refused to direct the Centre to transfer the contributions made to the PM CARES Fund for battling the COVID-19 pandemic to the National Disaster Response Fund NDRF saying both are entirely different funds with separate object and purpose PTI PKS SA

New Delhi [India], November 26 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Friday set December 10, for hearing on petitions relating to Prime Minister's Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund (PM CARES Fund).

Mumbai Nov 21 PTI Claiming that more than 700 farmers died during the year-long protest against the three contentions farm laws Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut on Sunday demanded that the kin of the deceased be given financial assistance from the PM CARES Fund two days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a repeal of the three legislations Speaking to reporters here Raut claimed that many tillers had died at the protest site near Delhi while some committed suicide and others killed in police firing Some were crushed to death in Lakhimpur Kheri All of them were protesting against the farm laws he said The government has now realised its mistake and withdrawn the farm lawsThere is a demand from different parts of the country that the kin of the farmers who lost their lives should be financially compensated Raut said Alleging that unaccounted money was lying in the PM CARES Fund Raut said this money should be used as ex-gratia for the kin of the deceased farmers Just apology to farmers is not enough Supporting their families is important he said apparently referring to the speech of the prime minister Queried about the health of Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray who is recuperating in a hospital after undergoing surgery Raut said Thackerays health is improving I spoke to Uddhavji yesterday Saturday We feel he should recover completely and then get back to work he said PTI MR NSK NSK

New Delhi [India], October 29 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Friday set November 18 for a hearing on a petition relating to Prime Minister's Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund (PM CARES Fund).

Mumbai : According to reports, Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut on Sunday lashed out on government. Over the alleged misuse of investigative agencies, Raut today alleged that “contract killings” are now replaced by “government killings” to finish off political rivals in Maharashtra. With some ministers in the Shiv Sena-led Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government under the scanner of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Income Tax, and at least one of them facing a CBI inquiry, Raut said that Central investigating agencies are working as “contract killers for the party in power in Delhi.” “Is there a rule of law or (a rule of) raids in Maharashtra?