Centre raises income limit for ST students and Allahabad HC bans caste-based rallies

Centre raises income limit for ST students

ST students To help Scheduled Tribe (ST) students avail professional education, the Centre decided to increase the total family income ceiling under its scholarship scheme from 2 lakh to 4.5 lakh per annum from this fiscal.

The central sector scholarship scheme of ‘Top Class Education for ST students’ had come into effect from 2007-08 for providing adequate financial support to ST students for pursuing education in selected premier institutions of the country.

The enhancement of the ceiling of the annual total family income from all sources will enable larger number of ST students avail benefits of the scheme.This will also act as a major incentive for ST students pursuing higher and technical education. The Centre also said that the decision does not entail any additional burden. The expenditure on account of revision of the scheme would be met under the existing budget allocation for each year.

---

Allahabad HC bans caste-based rallies

The Allahabad High Court stayed with immediate effect caste-based rallies throughout Uttar Pradesh, while issuing notices to central and state governments, the Election Commission, and four major political parties. 

“We stay caste-based rallies throughout the state of Uttar Pradesh,” the Lucknow bench of the court comprising Justices Uma Nath Singh and Mahendra Dayal said.

The ruling comes in the backdrop of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) recently organising Brahmin Bhaichara Sammelan in 40 districts of the state. Samajwadi Party (SP) too had organised a similar event in Lucknow recently besides a Muslim Sammelan.

The court also issued notices to the Indian National Congress (INC), Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), BSP and SP. The litigant submitted that there was a spurt of caste-based political rallies in the state and said that political parties were organising caste-based rallies in the name of different castes like Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya. The litigant submitted that while such events were causing damage to social unity and harmony, they were also vitiating the society which was against the spirit of the Constitution.