Journaling is all about writing down your daily life experiences and thoughts that helps you stay focus in your life and help identify the reasons that pushes you off the track at times from the path you have decided to follow to make your life better.
Here are the following 5 reasons that explains why keeping a journal is helpful for any individual who is struggling in their life.
1) It becomes your best friend in need- Most of the time journaling helps in emotionally unburdening ourselves from the hurt or disappointments or any other mental stress which we find uncomfortable sharing with others fearing judgements.You can write your deepest fears or deepest secrets into a diary and it would act as your secret keeper forever.Emotional unburdening by writing thus helps you clear your mind and help you focus on the important aspects in life.
2) Helps in solving your problems- writing down your thoughts everyday helps in tracking your thoughts and access it constructively. Writing down the problems you are facing at the present helps in shifting the problems from your brain to the paper which ultimately helps you in solving the issues, bringing more clarity on life. It let’s you understand what do you exactly want in life and what should you do to achieve it.
3) Self-reflection- journals help you keep a track of your important life events and when you go back in time, flipping the past pages of life you get to see how far you have come. It also helps you understand life better and gives you an insight about who you are as a person.
4) It tracks your overall development- having a habit of writing down you life experiences helps you to keep a check on your own habits and mistakes you have committed so far. It reminds you of not to do the same mistake ever again helping you to remember the lessons learned so far. It keeps a track of your progress as well. Going through your journal at every achievement you accomplish, makes you realise how you have got at the place you are at present.
5) Assists in personal growth- the best thing about journaling is that no matter what, it would always help you become a better person in the end. Journal writing can be used either for personal development, becoming a better version of yourself or achieving your life goals, it would always help you in analysing yourself practically and help you take the best decisions in life. Personal growth is thus the best outcome of journal writing.
So readers, try to pen down your thoughts and life experiences into a diary from today onwards, if you are not into the habit of journal writing and see the difference it brings to your life. Happy journaling!

The whole world is suffering from COVID-19 because of which schools, colleges and universities are temporarily closed. In between this, the National Testing Agency (NTA) has scheduled to conduct medical and engineering entrance exams – National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) and Joint Entrance Examination (JEE – Main) in September.

Every student and parent is now requesting the Union Education Minister to postpone the date of examinations as this would be really tough to give such examinations in these situations.

The social media is now trending with the hashtag #PostponeJEE_NEETInCovid . Even celebrities are also requesting the education minister to postpone the exams. On Tuesday, actor Sonu Sood urged the Government of India to take steps towards postponing these exams as it is unsafe for students to physically appear in the exams in view of the prevailing Covid-19 situation.

He tweeted, “It’s my request to government of India, to postpone the #Neet/#JEE exams in the current situation of the country! In the given #COVID19 situation, we should care utmost & not risk the lives of students. #PostponeJEE_NEETInCovid.”

Except him, Indian youtuber BeerBiceps aka Ranveer Allahbadia also tweeted, “As an Engineering graduate, I know how
stressful JEE can get for the students. I would urge the Govt. to look into postponing the NEET & JEE exams especially when we have evidence of the virus spreading due to reopening of colleges in other countries.”

Not only this, the urges to postpone the exams have gone on international level too. Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg on Tuesday expressed her solidarity with the students in India over the NEET and JEE exam row calling the situation ‘deeply unfair’. NEET and JEE Main exams have become a major issue in the country as thousands of students and parents protest against the exam which is being held in the midst of the Coronavirus pandemic.

She tweeted, “It’s deeply unfair that students of India are asked to sit national exams during the Covid-19 pandemic and while millions have also been impacted by the extreme floods. I stand with their call to #PostponeJEE_NEETInCovid.

Odisha CM Naveen Patnaik also wrote letter to Union Education Minister requesting to postpone these exams which are scheduled to be held in September.

Looking at the current situation it seems difficult that schools and colleges will reopen. Unlock 4 will start from next month September. But according to a report by a medical magazine schools may reopen with a hybrid schedule. Hybrid schedule means few students will take classes online and the rest will attend school. This may prove to be a good decision as not every student has access to online classes. this will make sure that students who don’t have access to online classes are not left behind in following the syllabus. According to a survey published in Indian Journal of Youth and Adolescence Health schools have reopened following the hybrid schedule in countries like Denmark and Germany. The same model can be applied in India as well. In this classes can be divided into small groups of students, is group can be called to school one after the other each week. Classes can continue in online-offline mode together. This way every student can get a chance to come to school. As for the journal due to lock down not every student is able to access same kind of education which is affecting students. This is the reason why shutting down schools for a long time will not be a good option.

It is quite remarkable, most reassuring and so refreshing to note that the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court just recently on August 20, 2020 in a latest, landmark and laudable judgment titled Shri Naini Gopal Vs The Union of India and Ors. in Case No. – LD-VC-CW-665 of 2020 has minced no words to hold that, “We need to remind the Bank that the pension payable to the employees upon superannuation is a ‘property’ under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and it constitutes a fundamental right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The deprivation, even a part of this amount, cannot be accepted, except in accordance with and authority of law.” Shri Naini Gopal, the octogenarian filed the petition after more than Rs 3.26 lakh was deducted from his account. The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on State Bank of India for deducting more than Rs 3 lakh from the account of the 85-year-old pensioner – Shri Naini Gopal. Very rightly so!

                                       To start with, the ball is set rolling by Justice RK Deshpande who authored this historic judgment for himself and Justice NB Suryawanshi of Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court in para 2 wherein it is observed about the background of this case that, “The petitioner Naini Gopal S/o Dhirendra Mohan Roy is retired as an Assistant Foreman from the Ordnance Factory at Bhandara with effect from 1-10-1994. The last drawn basic salary of the petitioner was Rs. 2,675/- and the basic pension was fixed at Rs. 1,334/- as on 1-10-1994. Consequent upon increase in the pension and the dearness allowance as per the recommendations of the 5^th, 6^th and 7^th Pay Commissions, the basic pension of Rs. 25,634/- was fixed, for which the petitioner was entitled to and accordingly he was paid.” 

                                     While elaborating further, it is then observed in para 3 that, “In the month of August 2019, the basic pension amount of the pensioner was reduced from Rs. 25,634/- to Rs. 25,250/- with effect from 1-1-2016 and accordingly, the respondent No. 3 – the Centralized Pension Processing Centre of the State Bank of India, directed recovery of an amount of Rs. 3,69,035/- from the pension payable to the petitioner in the installments of Rs. 11,400/-, i.e. 1/3^rd of the monthly pension with effect from 1-8-2019. The deduction of pension was without the consent or knowledge of the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 1-9-2019 to know the reason for deduction and details as to the revision of pension during the period 2015-16 and 2016-17. In response to this application, the petitioner received the reply on 20-9-2019 from the respondent No. 3 informing that there was excess payment of pension of Rs. 3,69,035/- to the petitioner, which was discovered after making the revised calculations.” 

                                    While illustrating further, para 4 then states that, “The petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court challenging such action and seeking further direction to the respondents to restore the position in respect of payment of pension, prevailing prior to the deduction which commenced from 1-8-2019. Reliance is placed upon the communication dated 4-12-2019 at Annexure-Q to the petition, issued by the Accounts Officer of the employer stating that the pension at the rate of Rs. 26,000/- was correctly notified vide 7^th CPC PPO No. 401199400151 (0101).”

                                      To be sure, it is then stated in para 5 that, “Initially, we heard the matter on 30-7-2020, when the following order was passed:

“Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned Counsel for the parties agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.

2) Issue notice for final disposal of the matter, returnable on 10/8/2020.

3) Smt. Sushma, learned Counsel waives service of notice for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4.

4) We have seen the impugned order dated 14/11/2019 issued by the State Bank of India. We are anxious to know as to whether the State Bank of India has acted on its own or on the basis of instructions issued by any other respondent in the matter. If we find that the action of the Bank is without any authority, we will have to impose heavy costs upon the Bank. Apart from this, if the amount is lying with the personal account of the petitioner, we are also surprised to note as to how the Bank is preventing or not permitting the petitioner to withdraw the amount. If any recovery is to be made, it will be open for the employer to make the same in accordance with law.

5) This order be communicated to the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, either on the e-mail address or on Whatsapp or by such other mode, as is permissible in law.””

               To put things in perspective, the Bench then notes in para 11 that, “It is the stand taken by the Bank that the revised pension of Rs. 9,102/- was payable to the petitioner as a civil pensioner, but the Bank calculated it as Rs. 9,974/- as a personnel below officer rank (PBOR) and thus paid an amount of Rs. 872/- per month in excess from October, 2007. Though we passed an order on 30-7-2020, reproduced earlier, to know the authority of the Bank to question this, we do not find any response to it in the reply filed, particularly when the Bank was knowing the stand of the employer supporting the claim of the petitioner for pension. We are of the view that it is not the authority of the Bank to fix the entitlement of the pension amount of the employees other than the employees of the respondent-Bank. We, therefore, hold that the action of the Bank to reduce the pension of the petitioner is unauthorized and illegal. Furthermore, the Bank has failed to demonstrate any technical error in the calculations.”     

                         While lambasting the Bank’s acts, the Bench then holds in para 13 that, “If the Bank had any doubt about the correctness of fixation of pension, it should have carried the correspondence with the employer and got the clarification. At least, an explanation in respect of the proposed deduction with retrospective effect from October 2007 should have been called from the petitioner. This is the bare minimum requirement of the principles of natural justice. No enquiry or investigation is made before taking the action impugned by the Bank. It is for the first time on 7-8-2020, i.e. after issuance of notice by this Court in the present petition, that the Bank started making enquiries and seeking clarifications from the employer of the petitioner in respect of pension and an assurance is given in the reply that the restoration of pension shall be done, as may be advised by the respondent Nos. 2 and 4, the employers. This exercise, in our view, should have been carried out prior to effecting the deductions from the pension payable to the petitioner. The entire action of the Bank, in our view, is arbitrary, unreasonable, unauthorized and in flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained.”  

                              Not stopping here, it is then further held and made amply clear in para 14 that, “The Bank is a trustee of the account of the pensioners, like the petitioner, and has no authority in the eyes of law to dispute the entitlement of the pension payable to the employees, other than those in the employment of the Bank. To tamper with such account and effect the recovery of pension without any authority, is nothing but a breach of trust of the petitioner by the Bank. We should not be understood to have said that even where there is technical error in calculation, other than of entitlement, is committed resulting in excess payment, the Bank cannot recover it. We have already held that no such case is made out here. The petitioner is of 85 years of age and in Para 5 of the petition, it is the claim that he bears a great liability of mentally disabled daughter, aged about 45 years, who has to be looked after mentally and physically, and the costly medical treatment is required to be administered. Instead of showing sensitivity to the problems of senior citizens, the Bank has shown the arrogance and the petitioner was driven from pillar to post to know the reasons for deduction of amount from the pension payable to him. Though we issued notice for final disposal of the matter, keeping in view that the petitioner is a senior citizen and requires immediate attention to his problem, the respondent-Bank has chosen to file only interim submissions on affidavit sworn-in by the Manager, State Bank of India, Medical College Area, Branch Nagpur.” 

                                As it turned out, the Bench then directs and points out in para 15 that, “The Bank has reduced the pension payable to the petitioner from Rs. 9,974/- to Rs. 9,102/- per month and the amount of Rs. 872/- per month is said to have been paid in excess to the petitioner, which is being recovered. In fact, an amount of Rs. 3,26,045/- has already been recovered and the recovery of the balance amount of Rs. 42,042/- is proposed to be made. We, therefore, need to direct the Bank to refund the amount of Rs. 3,26,045/- to the petitioner by crediting it in his pension account with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of deduction till the date of crediting such amount in the account of the petitioner. We have to restrain the Bank from recovering the balance amount of Rs. 42,042/- from the pension account of the petitioner. The Bank is required to be directed to pay the costs of Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner towards the expenses of this petition, mental agony and harassment, within a period of eight days from today; failing which the further costs of Rs. 1,000/- for each day’s delay shall have to be imposed.”   

                                Most significantly, the Bench then minces no words to say explicitly in para 16 that, “Before parting with this judgment, we need to remind the Bank that the pension payable to the employees upon superannuation is a ‘property’ under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and it constitutes a fundamental right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The deprivation, even a part of this amount, cannot be accepted, except in accordance with and authority of law.”

                      Before parting, it is then held in para 19 that, “In the result, the petition is allowed and the following order is passed:

(1) The action of the respondent No. 3-Bank in deducting an amount of Rs. 11,040/- per month with effect from October, 2019 is hereby quashed and set aside.

(2) We direct the respondent No. 3-Bank to immediately credit an amount of Rs. 3,27,045/- recovered from the pension account of the petitioner, along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of recovery of each of the installments, till the date of credit of this amount in the pension account of the petitioner.

(3) The respondent No. 3-Bank is restrained from recovering any amount from the pension payable to the petitioner on the basis of the action, which we have quashed and set aside.

(4) We direct the respondent No. 3-Bank to pay the compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner and credit the said amount in the pension account of the petitioner within a period of eight days from today, failing which the additional costs of Rs. 1,000/- for each day’s delay will have to be paid.

(5) We direct the Registry of this Court to forward the copies of this judgment to the Centralized Processing Pension Centres of all the Nationalized Banks and also to the Reserve Bank of India and the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, to consider the question of constitution of separate cell and role of appropriate guidelines so as to attain the constitutional goal of providing respect, dignity, care, sensitivity, assistance and security to all the pension account holders in the Banks.

(6) This judgment be uploaded under the digital signature of the Private Secretary.”

                           In a nutshell, the Bombay High Court in this case has made it abundantly clear that a pension is a property under Article 300 of the Constitution and this has to be always safeguarded. It also took to task the State Bank of India for not doing its job properly and imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 for deducting wrongly more than 3 lakhs from the account of 85-year-old pensioner named Naini Gopal as stated above! It also made it amply clear that senior citizens must be treated with due respect and those who are still in service must also themselves realize that they too shall retire one day and on their super-annuation will have to fight similarly for pension and post-retiral benefits! There can be no denying it!

Sanjeev Sirohi

The Government of India, the Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai Railway Vikas Corporation and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) today signed a loan agreement for a $500 million Mumbai Urban Transport Project-III to improve the network capacity, service quality and safety of the suburban railway system in Mumbai.

The Project is expected to increase network capacity in the region with the reduction in journey time and fatal accidents of commuters. It is estimated that among primary beneficiaries of the project, 22% are female passengers who will benefit from improved safety and quality of service.

The loan agreement was signed by Shri Sameer Kumar Khare, Additional Secretary, Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, on behalf of the Government of India, Shri Sanjay Kumar, Chief Secretary on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra, Shri R. S. Khurana,Chief Managing Director on behalf of the Mumbai Rail Vikas Corporationand Shri Rajat Misra, Director General (Acting), Investment Operations on behalf of the AIIB.

Shri Khare said that this project will assist in improved mobility, service quality and safety of passengers of the sub urban railway system of Mumbai, by providing faster, more reliable and higher quality transport services compared to road-based transport. There will be direct safety benefits to passengers and the public through introduction of trespass control measures.

With a population of 22.8 million (2011), Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) is the most populous metropolitan region in India and is expected to reach 29.3 million by 2031 and 32.1 million by 2041. This population growth represents the core driver behind Mumbai’s urban expansion, compelling the state of Maharashtra to prioritize sound urban and infrastructure planning which balances economic activities, mobility as well as the optimization of environmental and social outcomes.

Around 86 per cent of Mumbai commuters rely on public transport. However, supply has not kept pace with rising travel demand. The Mumbai suburban railway network, which carries three quarters of all motorized travel (78 per cent of passenger km or eight million passengers per day) increasing at three per cent annually, suffers from some of the most severe overcrowding in the world. User experience is further compromised by low amenity of carriages, substandard stations and station access, and serious safety concerns. Between 2002-2012, there were more than 36,152 fatalities (on average, 9.9 fatalities per day) and 36,688 injuries on the Mumbai suburban railway network. A key reason for accidents and deaths is trespassing at or between stations as well as overcrowding of both stations and train cars.

AIIB Vice President D.J. Pandian saidthat this project represents another major step in supporting our member countries in their efforts to provide transport capacity while removing transport bottlenecks, and thus improving the daily commuting experience of millions of Mumbaikars. In line with our Transport Sector Strategy, the Mumbai Urban Transport Project-III will also help in reducing carbon emissions by shifting passengers away from higher-carbon road transport towards efficient and convenient rail-based mobility. In addition, female passengers will benefit from improved safety and quality of service.

The total estimated cost of the project is $997 million, of which $500 million will be financed by the AIIB, $310 million by the Government of Maharashtra and $187 million by Ministry of Railways. The $500 million loan from the AIIB has a 5-year grace period and a maturity of 30 years.

In exercise of the powers conferred by section 16 of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 (40 of 2019), the Central Government has constituted a National Council for Transgender Persons vide notification dated 21^st August, 2020. The Union Minister of Social Justice & Empowerment will be Chairperson (ex-officio) and Union Minister of State for Social Justice & Empowerment will be Vice-Chairperson (ex-officio).

The National Council shall perform the following functions, namely:—

(a) to advise the Central Government on the formulation of policies, programmes, legislation and projects with respect to transgender persons;

(b) to monitor and evaluate the impact of policies and programmes designed for achieving equality and full participation of transgender persons;

(c) to review and coordinate the activities of all the departments of Government and other Governmental and non-Governmental Organisations which are dealing with matters relating to transgender persons;

(d) to redress the grievances of transgender persons; and

(e) to perform such other functions as may be prescribed by the Central Government.

The other members of the Council include representatives of various Ministries/Departments, five representatives of transgender community, representatives of NHRC and NCW, representatives of State Governments and UTs and experts representing NGOs.

A Member of National Council, other than ex officio member, shall hold office for a term of three years from the date of his nomination.

Union Education Minister Shri Ramesh Pokhriyal ‘Nishank’ reviewed various activities of NIOS in New Delhi today. The meeting was attended by Secretary, School Education and Literacy, Smt. Anita Karwal, Joint Secretary, School Education, Smt. Sweety Changsan and senior officials of NIOS.

During the meeting Shri Pokhriyal stressed on transparent working of the Institution so that it may produce better results. The Minister also discussed on strengthening the examination mechanism. He said that if we found some irregularities within the institution then we should take tough actions against the culprit. He directed NIOS officials that that if you receive any complaint against NIOS examination centres then you should resolve the complaint as soon as possible. He also directed NIOS officials to reform in examination process so that no one can question on the integrity of the prestigious institution. The Union Minister suggested creating a dashboard that must contains detailed information and contacts of all centres across the country. It will have all the information and suggestions from stakeholders so that transparency will be increased in the system.

Responding to the clarion call given by Hon’ble Prime Minister for “Atmanirbhar Bharat”, the Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) has taken several initiatives to strengthen the indigenous defence ecosystem.  Towards this, A DRDO delegation met with Raksha Mantri Shri Rajnath Singh today to apprise him about 108 systems and subsystems which have been identified for designing and development by the Indian Industry only. The list of technologies is enclosed at Appendix . This initiative will pave the way for Indian Defence industry to develop many technologies towards building an AtmaNirbhar Bharat.

DRDO will also provide support to industries for design, development and testing of these systems on requirement basis.  All the requirements of these systems by R&D establishments, Armed Forces, and other Security Agencies can be met through development contracts or production orders on suitable Indian industry. This will allow DRDO to focus on design & development of critical and advanced technologies and systems.

DRDO has been partnering with industry for realization of its systems. Collaborating with DRDO in the development of major weapon systems the Indian industry has matured to a stage where they can develop systems on their own. Indian industry has progressed from a ‘build to print’ partner to ‘build to specification’ partner. 

The present industry base for DRDO consists of 1800 MSMEs along with DPSUs, Ordnance Factories and large scale industries.  DRDO has already taken major initiatives through various policies to involve Indian industry as Development cum Production Partners (DcPP), offering its technology to industry at nominal cost and providing free access to its patents.  

This initiative will support the fast growing Indian defence industrial ecosystem and will help the industry to contribute towards “Atmanirbhar Bharat” in a big way.