NAGPUR, Maharashtra: The Shiv Sena on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court of India against Maharashtra governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari’s refusal to grant it more time to muster support for government formation.

Koshyari has recommended president’s rule in the state as Shiv Sena could not produce letters of support from 145 MLAs by its deadline on Monday night. The governor’s recommendation came even before the deadline granted to Sharad Pawar’s NCP, to express its willingness to form the government, ends at 8.30pm on Tuesday.

Shiv Sena has called the governor’s actions unfair. The petition, moved by party MLC Anil Parab, calls Koshyari’s move to grant just 24 hours to Shiv Sena and his refusal to extend it “arbitrary, unreasonable, unconstitutional, capricious and malafide”.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

The petition also claims that Shiv Sena had asked the governor to give it three days to submit the letters of support to prove its majority for forming the government.

Livemint quoted Shiv Sena’s lawyer Sunil Fernandes as saying that the SC registry said the matter may be mentioned before the court on Wednesday for urgent hearing.

Parab told a Marathi news channel that senior Congress leader and lawyer Kapil Sibbal would represent him in the Supreme Court.

Congress spokesperson Sachin Sawant also condemned the governor’s move to impose President’s rule in Maharashtra, alleging him of having a bias towards the BJP.

“As per the Allahabad high court judgement, the president’s rule is the last option. The judgement clearly says that every option should be exhausted before imposing the president’s rule. But no such situation was there in the state. The president’s rule was imposed when there emerged a possibility of the formation of a non-BJP government,” Sawant said in a video statement.

Sibal also termed the governer’s action unfortunate.

“It is unfortunate. The governors are following the decisions of those in power. The BJP was given 72 hours to prove support but when it came to opposition parties, they were only given 24 hours. He should have given sufficient time to Shiv Sena and others. The governors are behaving this way since 2014, which is very disturbing,” he told reporters in New Delhi.

NAGPUR, Maharashtra: Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray, NCP chief Sharad Pawar and senior Congress leader Ahmed Patel on Tuesday indicated that negotiations for government formation between the three parties will go on despite the president’s rule being imposed in Maharashtra on Tuesday evening.

Addressing a joint press confernce of NCP and Congress in Mumbai, Pawar and Patel informed that the Congress and NCP will deliberate first on the government formation before involving Shiv Sena in the discussions.

A joint statement issued by the alliance partners, who contested the election together and secured 98 seats in Maharashtra assembly, said that Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray approached the Congress for the first time on November 11.

Minutes after the Congress-NCP’s joint press conference, Uddhav Thackeray also addressed a press confernce in Mumbai and claimed that Congress-NCP’s statement, which says that he approached them for the first time only on Monday, has exposed BJP’s allegations that he was in touch with Congress-NCP.

Patel and Pawar told reporters that it was important for the alliance partners to achieve clarity before involving Shiv Sena in discussions.

“Yesterday was the first time Shiv Sena chief called Congress president Sonia Gandhi and asked for her support but it was our duty to consult our ally. There are some issues, which need to be discussed first before going ahead. We will talk to Shiv Sena once we discuss and come to a consensus with our alliance partner,” Patel said and criticized Maharashtra governor for not inviting Congress for government formation.

To a question on delay in supporting Shiv Sena, which led to the president’s rule in the state, Patel said, “ There is no question of delay because Shiv Sena approached us for the first time only on Monday.”

Taking a dig at Maharashtra governor Bhagat Singh Koshiyari, Pawar said that the Congress-NCP are not in any kind of hurry now “since the governor has provided more than ample to time to talk to Shiv Sena”.

To a query on ideological differences with Shiv Sena, the NCP chief said, “We have just begun the discussion, we will keep our ideological stance in mind before going ahead. Power distribution is not a subject before us at this point in time. First, we have to decide on government formation then we will discuss on the rest of the issues. Don’t worry, the governor has given us lots of time now.”

Uddhav Thackeray also took a dig at the governor for imposing the president’s rule in the state.

“The governor was so kind that he gave us six months when we asked for 48  hours. Such a kind governor will do many good things to the state. We were expecting a call from the governor but we were given a letter (to show our willingness) even before the deadline given to BJP had ended. The letter asked us to submit signatures of all supporting MLAs. We still have the claim but its not a child’s game to form a government and run it. We needed 48 hours as we did not have these parties’ letters. Shiv Sena, Congres, and NCP will sit and discuss on the common minimum program and take forward our claim on government formation,“Thackeray said.

When asked about ideology, he said, “It is true that Shiv Sena and BJP have similar ideologies but everyone saw what happened. I have asked for information on how PDP, TDP, Nitish Kumar and Ram Vilas Paswan came along with BJP despite having different ideologies.”

He reiterated that NCP-Congress’s joint statement showed he approached them for the first time on Monday.

“BJP and Shiv Sena had decided on sharing the CM post for two and a half years but the BJP lied on it and then tried to prove me a lier. I spoke to NCP-Congress for the first time yesterday which shows I did not go with them because of some allurements. BJP state chief Chandrakant Patil gave us best wishes to go ahead with Congress-NCP. Now, it won’t look good if we don’t accept our friend’s best wishes,” he added.

Terming the reports of BJP’s approach to Shiv Sena as speculations, the Shiv Sena chief said, “They (BJP) ended the alliance not me if you are saying the alliance has ended.”

Outgoing Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis also issued a statement on Tuesday evening terming the imposition of the president’s rule as “unfortunate” but hoped that the state will get a stable government soon.

However, former Maharashtra CM Narayan Rane, who recently joined the BJP, claimed that the BJP will make efforts to form the government in the state.

“I met the CM (Fadnavis) and he told me that we will be making efforts for government formation. The BJP will make every effort to form the government. We will do whatever it takes to form the government,” Rane said.

NEW DELHI—Three years after Prime Minister Narendra Modi forcibly implemented demonetisation, the Indian economy has entered a full-blown recession, said economics professor Arun Kumar, widely considered to be an authority on black money in India. The controversial decision, announced in a surprise speech by Modi in November 2016, affected the unorganised sector so adversely that the overall Indian economy is not growing any more, he said in an interview.

Kumar, who has been researching on black money in India for the past four decades, also said that far from addressing the problem of black money, demonetisation created new avenues for earning “black incomes”.

“Some people were taking their own notes and converting into new notes and generating fresh black income,” he said. 

An economy is said to be under recession if it registers negative growth for two consecutive quarters. In Kumar’s view, India has been under a recession for three years. But it was not visible thus far because the organised sector was growing at 7% or thereabouts so the government could claim India was the fastest growing big economy, he said. 

But now that the unorganised sector’s woes, which began with demonetisation, have hit the organised sector as well, the overall Indian economy is in a negative rate of growth.

“You have a negative rate of growth at the moment rather than a positive rate of growth. So it’s not 4.5% or 5% or 5.8%, it’s -1%,” he said. 

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

The former JNU professor said that the effect of demonetisation on the unorganised sector is continuing to play out even today.

Kumar, who currently teaches at the Institute of Social Sciences in New Delhi, said the current state of the economy is being called a “slowdown” because people look only at the official government figures about the growth of the Gross Domestic Product, which capture data only for the relatively better-off organised sector. 

“If you take the unorganised sector into account, our rate of growth became negative during that period of demonetisation and for months after that. And it has remained zero or negative right through. If you take only the organised sector into account, then there is a slowdown. But if you take the unorganised plus organised sector into account and look at alternate data, then we have been in a recession for the last three years, not a slowdown,” he said.  

The Malcolm S. Adiseshiah Chair Professor also said finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman’s announcement last week of a multi-crore package for the real estate sector will neither help the sector nor the economy emerge from its core problems. Announcing one package after another, as the finance ministry has been doing, shows “panic”, he added. 

Edited excerpts from an interview:

It is now three years since Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced demonetisation. In your book Demonetisation and Black Economy, you write that “Demonetisation is one of the most important economic events in the country, not only of 2016-17, but possibly of the last two decades, even though other momentous events have taken place...its implications are playing themselves out even now and will continue to impact the economy for some time”. You wrote this in 2017. How do you look back at the event in November 2019? Does it have any impact at present on the economy?

So, you know, what is demonetisation? It means that your currency, the high-denomination currency notes, it stopped being legal tender from November 8, 2016 midnight. 

Now, what is the role of cash? Role of cash is to circulate incomes. I buy something from you so I give you cash, and I get goods or services in return. You pay that as salary or you purchase something; so cash is only circulating incomes. Now, when cash becomes short, then circulation of incomes stops or slows down. So as I have been characterising, it’s like blood in the body. The blood in the body supplies oxygen and nutrients to all parts of the body. If blood becomes short, then the body dies.  So similarly when cash becomes short, then the income generation process goes down and therefore the economy runs itself down. 

And in India, we have two sectors, the organised sector and the unorganised sector. Organised sector is the big sector, it’s more formalised, it can work with banking and cheques, credit cards, debit cards, electronic transfers but the unorganised sector is very small, it does not work like that, it depends on cash. So the moment the cash shortage came, it’s the unorganised sector that got hit very badly. And unorganised sector produces 45% of the output, 94% of the workforce is there. Now when such a large workforce loses its jobs, it starts running itself down, then the demand in the economy comes down. When the demand comes down then it slows down the investment in the economy and therefore growth rate slows down. And that is exactly what happened with demonetisation. 

Unorganised sector really slowed down.  All the data that was coming from private organisations like the Punjab Haryana Delhi Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the State Bank of India, all that showed that the unorganised sector declined dramatically. And therefore, the rate of growth of the economy also declined. The rate of investment, as per CMIE data, became half of the average of the preceding eight quarters. From Rs 2.5 lakh crore average it became Rs 1.36 lakh crore.

The demand for MGNREGA shot up. The reason is that people went back from urban areas to rural areas because they didn’t have work in urban areas and therefore, they went back and demanded work under the MGNREGA scheme. So the budgetary allocation shot up and that has not yet come down.  That has continued to grow. From Rs 38,000 crore it went to Rs 47,000 crore to Rs 55,000 crore; now it’s more than Rs 60,000 crore. The RBI data shows that the work under MGNREGA is only 45 days, not 100 days. So if full 100 days was given, then instead of Rs 60-65,000 crore, you would have been spending Rs 1.5 lakh crore, which shows that people haven’t really come back to the urban areas from the work that was lost in the small, micro sectors and so on. 

So my argument was then and remains that it was the unorganised sector that unambiguously got affected, and that affected the organised sector also at that point of time. But our GDP data does not include the data for the unorganised sector separately. It assumes that the unorganised sector is growing at the same rate as the organised sector. So if the organised sector is growing at 6%, it is assumed that the unorganised sector is also growing at 6%. That was true on November 7, 2016 but not true on November 9, 2016. 

So since that time, our GDP data does not represent the unorganised sector. 

Now, if you take the data from the alternative sources like the MGNREGS data, like the decline in employment which the CMIE and the NSSO both have shown, the fall in the credit offtake, decline in the investment rate. You know, all that points to the fact that the rate of growth became negative at the time of demonetisation. Soon thereafter, the GST hit the unorganised sector. So even though the GST exempts the unorganised sector, it is so complicated and structurally flawed that the unorganised sector took a hit again. And then the third shock was the NBFC crisis (because) the loans from there do matter for consumption as well as for production in the unorganised sector.  

So these three big shocks one after the other affected the unorganised sector adversely. And that is now affecting the organised sector also. The organised sector rate of growth has also been coming down from 8.1% six quarters back to now 5% and my guess is that this quarter, it will be less than 4.5% because the growth has continued to decline. You know, the automobile sector and other sectors are continuing to decline. So therefore the rate of growth is likely to fall even further. 

So at this point again, the rate of growth is negative. Because this is only the organised sector rate of growth, it’s not the unorganised sector rate of growth. And you have evidence pointing to the fact that the unorganised sector is continuing to suffer because, like for instance last year, the pressure cooker industry chairperson Mr Jagannathan, he said, we find that units in the organised sector are growing because units in the unorganised sector are not able to cope with the demand problem. They are not able to cope with the various other problems that they face. So he says that demand has shifted from the unorganised sector to us. And similar things you will find in the textile industry, in the show industry, in other industries. 

The point I am making is that the effect of demonetisation on the unorganised sector is continuing to play itself out even today. And therefore the rate of the economy is negative, it’s not a slowdown of the economy to 5% or 4.5%.

If you take the unorganised sector into account, our rate of growth became negative during that period of demonetisation and for months after that. And it has remained zero or negative right through. If you take only the organised sector into account, then there is a slowdown. But if you take the unorganised plus organised sector into account and look at alternate data, then we have been in a recession for the last three years, not a slowdown. 

If I were to parse the different strands of what you said, you mentioned three different things that have adversely affected the Indian economy since 2016—demonetisation, GST and the NBFC crisis. But how much of causality can we really link back to demonetisation alone? Because these are three different processes, policy decisions or events.

So there were three shocks to the economy one after the other. But the demonetisation was the first shock and its impact has continued, even though it ended, because of the cash shortage. You know, the recovery of the economy becomes difficult unless investment rises. And investment rate has been stagnating at 30% since that time. So the investment has not risen. In that sense, what happened during demonetisation, impact on investment, output, employment, credit off-take, all that initiated the shock and we have not recovered from it. 

But the absence of recovery, as you put it, can it be fully blamed on demonetisation?

So, as I said, that was the start, right? And then the shocks continued, and further aggravated the situation. 

So if we were to parse separately demonetisation alone, its impact till date in 2019 November is being felt in the investment rate...

Investment rate, in the MGNREGS demand for work that means people haven’t come back, the low credit off-take that has been there in the last three years—all of these started then and have continued.

Of course, as I said, the other two shocks also contributed. But the initial shock was from there and there has been no recovery from that. 

So it was the beginning of a series of shocks. 

That’s right. 

Recently I interviewed Prof. Pranab Sen. In that interview he said that demonetisation was the “initial trigger” for the current economic slowdown. Former PM Manmohan Singh also seems to agree with Mr Sen. What is your view about their assessments? Are you essentially saying the same thing in a different way?

No. I said slowdown was triggered because the rate of growth became negative. So what Manmohan is not saying, or others are not saying, is: how do you measure the unorganised sector? Manmohan Singh only talked about decline of 2% but I am saying the decline was 7% or 9% during demonetisation. Because unorganised sector is 45% of GDP. 

According to Punjab Haryana Delhi Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the impact on unorganised sector was 50%. Now if 45% declines by 50% that’s -22.5%. And if you add to that the organised sector growing at, say, even 6% or 7%, that still means a -15% rate of growth. I am saying, suppose the fall was not 15%, only 10%, then also the rate of growth became negative. 

So my argument is that the data for the GDP is incorrect after 9 November 2016. Because it does not take the unorganised sector into account. Now, Pronab Sen says that but doesn’t follow it up with the implications of that. Because if you are using the unorganised sector data as being the organised sector data then your data is incorrect. Because all evidence says the unorganised sector got hit disproportionately more. So while the organised sector may be rising, the unorganised sector is falling. 

As I said, if 45% falls by 10% that’s -4.5%. And if organised sector is rising at 5%, then 55% rising at 5% is 2.7%. So therefore you have a negative rate of growth at the moment rather than a positive rate of growth. So it’s not 4.5% or 5% or 5.8%, it’s -1%. 

All of it tracing back to the demonetisation decision?

It started there but it has continued because of these additional shocks. So in that sense, what Manmohan Singh or Pronab Sen are saying is not really the complete picture. 

Unorganised sector data has to be taken into account because you can’t say that we will continue to use the GDP data because the government is not correcting it, because it is incorrect. It is based on the incorrect assumption that the unorganised sector is rising at the same rate as the organised sector. So we have to look for alternate data and then calculate the rate of growth. There is where the problem of rate of growth exists. 

In a recent interview, former chairman of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, Surjit Bhalla, said that he still believes demonetisation was a “big bang” and important economic reform. He also said that demonetisation has nothing to do with the current economic slowdown. What do you make of these assertions?

So Mr Bhalla, when demonetisation was done, had himself argued that if he had been asked whether demonetisation should be done, he would have said it should not be done. That is what his statement was. Now whatever he says, is a different matter. 

So indeed it was a very major step. It damaged the economy no end. But to say it was a positive step is a problem. Because it impacted the unorganised sector and therefore the GDP. So if we lost, say, 7% or 8% growth at that point of time, then on a Rs150 lakh crore economy, we were losing about Rs 10 lakh crore of GDP. Nothing can make up for that.

Coming to the current economic realities, data for core sector output for September shows that it has fallen to -5.2%, the lowest in 14 years according to reports. So what does this say about the ongoing economic slowdown in India’s economy? 

This is an indication. Because what is the core sector? It is an input into the economy. Whether it be energy, transportation and so on. 

All the data, the core sector data, the decline in Index on Industrial production—they are all pointing to the fact that we are in a recession, we are no more a growing economy for the last three years. So we have lost at least Rs 28 lakh crores worth of output in the last three years cumulatively. 

That’s a mind-boggling figure. 

In the budget, the government said it expected 12% rate of growth of the GDP but the economy is growing, according to official figures, at barely 7%. Therefore, instead of being Rs 211 lakh crore, which was assumed in the budget, the GDP will be something like Rs 196 lakh crore. Therefore, tax will be short. And therefore fiscal deficit will rise, and therefore they will cut back on expenditure to maintain 3.3% fiscal deficit then that would mean further decline in the economy. So it’s a bad situation whether it be taxation, expenditure by government, output or investment and employment.

In response to the ongoing criticism of the government from several quarters regarding the slowdown, the Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced that the cabinet approved the establishment of a ‘Special Window’ fund to provide priority debt financing for the completion of stalled housing projects that are in the Affordable and Middle-Income Housing sector. An official release said “real estate industry is intrinsically linked with several other industries, growth in this sector will have a positive effect in releasing stress in other major sectors of the Indian economy as well.” What do you make of this?

We have to see why the real estate/construction sector went into a crisis. And this crisis is not just from the time of demonetisation, it is a six-seven year old crisis because of oversupply. And why the oversupply there? Because real estate prices shot up. 

This crisis that has been there in the real estate sector is because of the high land prices and high cost of housing, which the unorganised sector is not able to afford. People dependent upon the unorganised sector largely live in slums in urban areas. So this will not touch them. This is a package for the middle class and the upper middle class. And we have to admit that that’s where the problem is. But what is the problem? Problem is that there is a lot of black money in that. Therefore there is a diversion of funds by the builders and developers. And the second problem is that this business was running on what are called financiers. The financiers are ones who initially put up their money for half or three quarters of the project. Now they have withdrawn money because they see no rise. The financiers were investing for speculation. Because they have withdrawing money, that’s why the crisis is there. Second reason is the developers would transfer whatever money they collected to other projects. So the project would suffer. Now, under RERA, that can be stopped. 

But the point is at these high prices, how many people would really be able to buy property? So therefore, problem really is not what they have done. Those are some of the problems, but the other problems of black, high cost of land, of transfer of money etc. Those problems need to be addressed. Then the upper middle class and middle class may be able to get their projects, construction would revive. But I think this is a long-term thing. It’s not going to address the short term problem that exists in the real estate sector. 

So therefore, this is my problem with what the Ministry of Finance has been doing over the last three months: announcing one package after the other. First what this shows is panic. Because they have been in denial for the last three years that the economy is in recession. They have been claiming that the economy is the fastest growing large economy in the world. So they have been in denial and therefore they have delayed it. And the recession is deepening and it has affected the organised sector also. Once the organised sector, the corporates, started complaining then they started giving concessions. But the point is: that is not the solution. 

On this note, let me ask you about the corporate tax cuts…

That is not going to increase expenditure because they consume what they consume. The problem started with the unorganised sector and you are doing very little for them. Except for the PM Kisan scheme and the pension in the unorganised sector. But when you give money to the corporates, they are not going to increase expenditures, investment they could increase but if demand is not there why would they increase investment? 

So I have been giving the example that suppose Maruti can produce 100 cars but selling only 70 cars then you tell Maruti to increase capacity to 120 but sales are only 70 so its losses will increase. Because now it has spare capacity for 50 cars. So therefore, unless demand increases, and to increase demand you have to pump in purchasing power into the unorganised sector and then the increased expenditure could lead to rise in food prices and then the farmers’ incomes will rise. And then the demand will rise. 

The problem is coming from demand, from lack of incomes in the unorganised sector, in the farming sector, that is what needs to be addressed. 

If we had Rs 1.45 lakh crore for the corporates plus for the real estate sector, plus for the banking sector about Rs 3 lakh crores to spend, which will increase our fiscal deficit, if that had been pumped into the unorganised sector, demand would have immediately increased. But somehow the government is focused only on the organised sector and the corporate sectors, not where the problem really began. 

I want to come back to the issue of demonetisation. In your book, you mention that demonetisation failed because the understanding that cash equals black money that the government as well as people at large had was wrong. Instead, you explain that black money is created through a process run by a triad of corrupt businessmen, politicians and the executive. Could you elaborate and explain this?

There are several misperceptions about black economy. One was that black equals cash. But that is not true because black works in a variety of ways. Cash is held by businesses for working capital and is held by households for their daily requirements plus for precautions etc. So all clash is not black. Only a tiny percentage of cash is really black because it is in circulation. So that’s one misperception. 

Second misperception of the black economy is that all black money is held abroad. Now, if all the money is held abroad then demonetisation of the Rupee does not help. Then you have to demonetise where it is held; suppose it is held in dollars, then you have to demonetise the dollar; if it is held in the Swiss banks, you have to demonetise the Swiss Franc. But 90% of the black income generated stays here. Only 10% goes abroad and off that also, 30-40% is recycled back through round tripping. So it comes back. 

There are a lot of misperceptions like these. 

Black means cash was one of the misperceptions because of which the government went for this step. And the public also thought something positive is being done on this score. This was a complete misperception on the part of the government and people and that is why all cash came back in the banking system within 60 days... 

But we got diverted. There was a second part to your question. 

Yes, it was about the triad that helps people create black money in India. 

The point is: what is the cause of generation of black income? So the cause lies in the fact that there is a black economy, which is illegal.  Doctors not showing their true output, businessmen not showing the true amount of trading, factory owner not showing true amount of production. So therefore, you’re not measuring that. 

So how is illegality possible on a large scale in legal activities? If I am doing smuggling, that’s completely illegal; if I am doing theft, that’s completely illegal; if I am doing sex work, that’s completely illegal. 

When I commit illegality in legal sectors on a large scale, then it’s only possible if those who are a part of the state are party to it. So therefore, the policymaker, the politician, the executive, you know, the bureaucrat, the police, the judiciary, they are a part. So that’s why I say it’s a triad consisting of the corrupt businessman, the corrupt politician and the corrupt executive. 

If this triad is not formed and if the policymaker says, “I’m not going to accept this kind of corruption”, then the triad will collapse. If the executive says, “We’re not going to be bound by this corruption, you’re not going to take a cut, we’re going to enforce the law strictly then also it will collapse”. If the businessman says, “We are not going to bribe anymore, we are not going to do this illegal activity”, then it will collapse. So it is this triad which is running the black economy. 

It is not, as some people say, things like high tax rate or high degree of controls are reasons for corruption because controls cannot be the reason for their own violation. 

In 1971 when Mrs. Gandhi was the Finance Minister, we had 97.5% tax here and the black economy then measured by the Justice Wanchoo Committee was 7%. Now, the black economy has come up to 62% but tax rate has come down to 30%. So tax rates have systematically come down for the last 50 years, black income generation has increased.

I want to move to a point you make in the book which is not as widely recognised, this is that demonetisation generated new black incomes. So that would sound to most people as a contradiction right? Because the whole point of demonetisation was to curb black economy, if not completely do away with it. So what is this new black income you talk about?

So, as I said earlier, this idea of demonetisation was based on black means cash, which is incorrect. So it is not designed to tackle the black economy at all.

But what happened was people went to the banks and changed their old notes in collusion with the bankers and the police and RBI, and some of them were even arrested. During that period, raids were being held, where large sums of new cash were caught with other people. So, this is why I said, the new black income generation, because the 1000 rupee and 500 rupee were going at 30% discount. 

That means some people were taking their own notes and converting into new notes and generating fresh black income. Then there were many businessmen who had shown cash in hand especially in real estate. And they converted again at 30% discount and then because they had cash in hand, they needed the old notes. 

So, in the last 15 days there was a premium on the 1000 rupee note. So the 1000 rupee note earlier was going for 700 then started going for 1300. So, that was another black income generation process that was taking place. 

In the book, you take a detailed look at demonetisations held in other countries over the past one century and more. One clear conclusion you arrive at is that India is probably the only nation state which had an unplanned demonetisation and now it is a case study for economists the world over. So, the sense I got from what you wrote there is that you would have preferred a well-planned demonetisation. It’s not as if you are opposed to the idea of demonetisation per se. 

It’s very clear that I don’t think demonetisation solved the problems that the Prime Minister attacked. Demonetisation wasn’t called for, it damaged the unorganised sector so it damaged the economy as a whole. So demonetisation doesn’t solve problems, but creates additional problems...

Now if the note shortage was not there, and if you had done replacement of the old currency with the new currency, then there would not have been a problem. I gave the example of the Euro. it was introduced to replace the Mark in Germany and Franc in France, among others, and conversation was done over three years. And for five years after that, you could change your currency in Germany. It was planned. So there was no problem, no shortage of currency. 

In other countries where demonetisation was introduced, it was done either with full preparation or there was a crisis, the local currency had collapsed. Like Ruble in Russia, Mark in Germany after the Second World War. In India we had no crisis like that. Therefore, it becomes a case study. 

So you are saying if the Prime Minister was intent on doing it, he should have planned it and done it. 

Planned it in terms of he should have had enough of new currency to replace the old currency so there would have been no cash shortage. If you wanted to do that in secrecy, then you should have got the RBI to print the notes and change the ATMs so that the new currency could fit into them, have the new trays ready etc. 

When there is hyper-inflation, war, economic crisis, there you need to do demonetisation but not in a well functioning economy. Therefore it cannot be the silver bullet that it was thought to be. You need to have movements against black economy, strengthen your democracy, strengthen your accountability—that is what is needed. 

Hillary Clinton said Tuesday she had no plans to become the latest Democrat to throw her hat into an already crowded ring vying for the presidency, but said Tuesday “many, many, many people” had urged her to enter the race before 2020 filing deadlines.

“I, as I say, never, never, never say never,” Clinton, who won the popular vote in the 2016 race, but ultimately lost to President Donald Trump, told BBC Radio 5 Live on Tuesday. “I will certainly tell you I’m under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it. But as of this moment, sitting here in this studio talking to you, that is absolutely not in my plans.”

Clinton was speaking to the BBC as part of a press tour alongside her daughter, Chelsea Clinton, to promote their new project, “The Book of Gutsy Women.”

A slew of establishment Democrats have been mulling their own bids in recent days, just before some states’ filing deadlines for candidates to get their names on the books for the primaries. Billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to file paperwork in Arkansas this week in anticipation of a potential bid, although he has reportedly not made a final decision about the 2020 race. Former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is also considering a last-minute candidacy.

But it’s unclear if Americans even want more Democratic choices. The party has spent months winnowing down a field that at one point topped 20 candidates, and recent polls show that many Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters already felt the party had several candidates who could defeat Trump.

Clinton has stated multiple times that her presidential aspirations are over for now, although she has said she often imagines what the White House would’ve been like were she elected in 2016.

“Look, I think all the time about what kind of president I would’ve been and what I would’ve done differently and what I think it would’ve meant to our country and the world. So of course I think about it, I think about it all the time,” Clinton said on Tuesday. “Whoever wins next time is going to have a big task trying to fix everything that’s been broken.”

NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court will pronounce on Wednesday its verdict on petitions challenging the Delhi High Court decision bringing the office of the chief justice of India (CJI) under the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi will pronounce the judgement at 2 pm. Other members of the bench are Justices N V Ramana, D Y Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna.

The notice regarding the pronouncement of the judgement was made public on the apex court’s official website on Tuesday afternoon.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

A five-judge constitution bench had on April 4 reserved its verdict on the appeals filed in 2010 by the Supreme Court secretary general and its central public information officer against the high court and the central information commission’s (CIC’s) orders

The bench, headed by the chief justice, had wrapped up the hearing, saying nobody wants a “system of opaqueness”, but the judiciary cannot be destroyed in the name of transparency.

“Nobody wants to remain in the state of darkness or keep anybody in the state of darkness,” it had said. “The question is drawing a line. In the name of transparency, you can’t destroy the institution.”

In a landmark verdict on January 10, 2010, the Delhi High Court had held that the office of the chief justice of India comes within the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) law, saying judicial independence was not a judge’s privilege, but a responsibility cast upon him.

The 88-page judgement was then seen as a personal setback to the then CJI, K G Balakrishnan, who has been opposed to disclosure of information relating to judges under the RTI Act.

The high court verdict was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice A P Shah (since retired) and Justices Vikramjit Sen and S Muralidhar. The bench had dismissed a plea of the Supreme Court that contended bringing the CJI’s office within the RTI Act would “hamper” judicial independence.

Justice Sen retired as the judge of the apex court, while Justice Murlidhar is a sitting judge of the high court.

The move to bring the office of the CJI under the transparency law was initiated by RTI activist S C Agrawal. His lawyer Prashant Bhushan had submitted in the top court that though the apex court should not have been judging its own cause, it is hearing the appeals due to “doctrine of necessity”.

The lawyer had described the reluctance of the judiciary in parting information under the Right To Information Act as “unfortunate” and “disturbing”, asking: “Do judges inhabit different universe?“

He had submitted that the apex court has always stood for transparency in functioning of other organs of State, but it develops cold feet when its own issues require attention.

Referring to the RTI provisions, Bhushan had said they also deal with exemptions and information that cannot be given to applicants, but the public interest should always “outweigh” personal interests if the person concerned is holding or about to hold a public office.

Dealing with “judicial independence”, he said the National Judicial Accountability Commission Act was struck down for protecting the judiciary against interference from the executive, but this did not mean that judiciary is free from “public scrutiny”.

“This is not the independence from accountability. Independence of judiciary means it has to be independent from the executive and not independent from common public. People are entitled to know as to what public authorities are doing,” Bhushan had said.

The deliberations of the collegium in appointing and overlooking judges or lawyers should be made public and information can be parted with under RTI on case-to-case basis keeping in mind the larger public interest, the lawyer had said.

The bench had said people, of late, were opting out and do not want to become judges because of the fear of negative publicity.

“On interaction, the reason appears to be the possibility of the negative observations, whether rightly or wrongly, being brought into the public domain,” it had observed.

In such a case, besides losing judgeship and reputation, the professional and family life of the person are adversely affected, it had said.

The apex court had said it had brought about changes in the functioning of the collegium system and said now members have started interacting with prospective candidates.

Just after losing to Alexander Zverev in the ATP World Tour Finals on Monday, Rafael Nadal nearly suffered a loss for words in the post-match press conference. 

The tennis star, who is currently ranked number one in the world, got into it with Italian reporter Ubaldo Scanagatta.

The journalist questioned whether Nadal’s recent wedding to his girlfriend of 15 years had anything to do with his defeat in the finals. Nadal and Xisca Perello wed in Mallorca on Oct. 19. He previously said that he took only one day off after their wedding.

“Tonight, you were playing very short many times ― I don’t know why, you’re not used to that. I’d like to know, for many people to get married is a very important, distracted thing. Before the marriage, during the marriage, after the marriage,” Scanagatta says, though he doesn’t appear in the video of the exchange.

“Your concentration on tennis life has been [a] bit different even if you were going out with the same girl for many, many years,” he added.

“Honestly, are you asking me this?” Nadal said to the reporter, clearly in disbelief. “Is this a serious question or a joke? Is it serious? Yeah?”

The tennis player began rubbing his face and grimaced before answering.

“It’s a big surprise you’re asking me this after being with the same girl for 15 years and having a very stable and normal life. It doesn’t matter if you put a ring on your finger or not,” Nadal said. “In my personal way. I am a very normal guy. Maybe it was for you ― how long have you been with your [wife]?”  

When the reporter said that they’d been together for 30 years, Nadal replied, “And before? Ah, maybe before you were not sure. That’s why. OK. We move to [the] Spanish [interview portion], because that’s bullshit.” 

He signed off with a “Thank you very much,” before ending the English portion of the press conference. 

Nadal has said he took time off before the wedding, but had only one day with Perello after the wedding before hitting the court again.

“After the wedding I had the Sunday off,” Nadal told the Tennis Channel’s Prakash Amritraj in October. “And then Monday, Tuesday, practice.”

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Hong Kong prepared for more clashes on Wednesday as anti-government protesters planned to paralyze parts of the Asian financial hub for a third day, with transport, schools and many businesses closing after violence escalated across the city.

Protesters and police battled through the night at university campuses and other locations only hours after police Senior Superintendent Kwong Wing-cheung said the Chinese-ruled city had been pushed to the “brink of a total breakdown”.

Police fired tear gas at protesters overnight, while some activists torched a vehicle, hurled petrol bombs at a police station and metro train and broke into a major shopping mall.

Hundreds of commuters were seen queuing at metro stations across the city early on Wednesday after some railway services were suspended and roads closed.

Riot police were deployed to stations, while protesters set up roadblocks and barricades on major thoroughfares.

Protesters are angry about what they see as police brutality and meddling by Beijing in the freedoms guaranteed under the “one country, two systems” formula put in place when the former British colony returned to Chinese rule in 1997.

China denies interfering and has blamed Western countries, including Britain and the United States, for stirring up trouble.

Protesters were planning more demonstrations throughout Wednesday in areas including the Central business district, home to some of the world’s most expensive real estate and luxury stores, across the Kowloon peninsula and in the outlying New Territories.

“We just want to affect the Hong Kong economy to let the government know we are serious about our demands,” said a 21- year-old student named Lee, who had spent the night making petrol bombs at City University.

“Every day, everywhere, people are getting hurt.”

Hundreds of masked protesters, many of them students, hurled rocks and bricks, some launched with catapults, during Tuesday’s protests.

There were chaotic scenes through the night of explosions, smoke plumes, yelling and sustained gunfire during which scores were injured. Hong Kong’s Hospital Authority said 81 people had been injured since Monday, with two in serious condition.

The youngest was 10 months old but the cause of the infant’s injuries was not known.

Many schools and universities canceled classes on Wednesday over safety concerns after the Education Bureau announced that parents could decide whether to send their children to school and urged them not participate in “unlawful activities”.

Hong Kong’s embattled leader Carrie Lam said on Tuesday protesters trying to paralyze the city were being “extremely selfish”.

The “Game of Thrones” coffee cup mystery is just like Jon Snow ― it has come back from the dead.

Of all the unanswered questions and unresolved plotlines in the show, this is the one that just won’t quit: Who left the coffee cup in the shot during Season 8, Episode 4?

Fans thought they finally had their answer last month when Emilia Clarke appeared on “The Tonight Show” and told host Jimmy Fallon that she knew who the culprit was. Now, her allegations against co-star Conleth Hill have been called into question.

“We had like a party before the Emmys recently, and Conleth Hill, who plays Varys, who’s sitting next to me in that scene, he pulls me aside and he’s like, ‘Emilia, I’ve got to tell you something. I’ve got to tell you something, love. The coffee cup was mine!’” Clarke told Fallon.

“It was his! It was Conleth’s coffee cup. He said so! He’s like, ‘I think so, I’m sorry, darling, I didn’t want to say anything because it seemed the heat was very much on you.’”

On Sunday, Hill told British broadcaster Channel 4 he was neither confirming nor denying the allegations.

“You know, there’s no proof that I did it. So accuse away,” he said. 

“I would need to have had Mr. Man arms to leave a coffee cup there,” he added. “I took a bullet for Emilia Clarke and she touted on me.” (Mr. Men is a British children’s book series that features one character with comically long arms.)

“I’m just not making any comments until I have a lawyer!” Hill added.

Looks like the buck has been passed yet again. Previously, Sophie Turner, who played Sansa Stark, accused Clarke of the deed.  

HBO responded to the coffee cup blunder when the episode was first released: “The latte that appeared in the episode was a mistake. Daenerys had ordered an herbal tea.”

While HBO could’ve left viewers wondering if Westeros was, in fact, the first-ever location for a Starbucks, the show ended up taking action and the cup was digitally erased from the scene less than 48 hours after it aired. 

WASHINGTON — Around 60 incidents of hate crimes against Sikhs were reported to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation in 2018, making the community the third most commonly targeted religious group after Jews and Muslims in the US, according to an annual report released by the FBI on Tuesday.

A total of 7,120 hate crimes were reported to the FBI by law enforcement agencies around the country last year, slightly down from 7,175 in 2017, the FBI said, adding that this involved 8,496 offences.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

The largest number of hate crimes based on religion were reported against Jews (835), followed by Muslims (188) and Sikhs (60). According to the FBI report, 91 hate crimes were reported against other religion, including 12 against Hindus and ten anti-Buddhist crimes.

Of the 4,047 hate crimes based on ethnicity, the maximum 1943 hate crime incidents were against anti-Black or African Americans, followed by anti-White (762) and anti-Hispanic or Latino (485).

The FBI reports as many as 148 hate crimes against Asians in 2018, while those against Arabs were 82, anti-American Indian or Alaska Native (194).

The Sikh Coalition in a statement said it is “disheartening” that hate crimes remain systematically “under-reported” across the United States.

According to the Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, Americans experience an average of 250,000 hate crimes per year; this latest FBI data, by contrast, only managed to document 7,120 incidents, with less than 13 per cent of law enforcement affirmatively providing reports of hate crimes, it said.

“While hate crimes remained relatively steady nationally, reported anti-Sikh hate crimes rose by 200 percent since 2017, making Sikhs the third most commonly targeted religious group in the dataset,” it said.

“At the end of the day, this data simply isn’t giving us the accurate information we need to effectively counteract hate against targeted communities,” said Sim J. Singh, Sikh Coalition senior manager of Policy and Advocacy.

“It’s past time for action. Congress must pass the next generation of common-sense legislation that equips law enforcement to better identify and track hate incidents,” he said.

The Los Angeles Clippers beat the NBA champion Toronto Raptors on Monday, but the hottest action wasn’t on the court.

Celebrity lovebirds Shawn Mendes and Camila Cabello scored major PDA in the Staples Center sideline seats ― kissing, nuzzling and cuddling the evening away.

Dare we say they out-smooched Pete Davidson and Kate Beckinsale at a Rangers hockey game in New York last March?

Talk about a full-court press.

These “Senorita” singers have sucked face before in front of a large audience, French-kissing comically in an Instagram to troll critics who said they kissed like fish.

OK, they’re kinda cute carrying on. And they did appear to take in the action on the court from time to time.

The two revealed recently that they officially became a couple on the Fourth of July.

But they continued the fireworks for NBA fans.

The two came up for air to cheer.

This should put last month’s breakup rumors to bed for good.

LONDON — Vodafone said its future in India could be in doubt unless the government stopped hitting operators with higher taxes and charges, after a court judgment over licence fees resulted in a 1.9 billion euro group loss in its first half.

Chief Executive Nick Read said India, where Vodafone formed a joint venture with Idea Cellular in 2017, had been “a very challenging situation for a long time”, but Vodafone Idea still had 300 million customers, equating to a 30% share of the sizable market.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

“Financially there’s been a heavy burden through unsupportive regulation, excessive taxes and on top of that we got the negative supreme court decision,” he said on Tuesday.

Vodafone had asked the government for a relief package comprising a two-year moratorium on spectrum payments, lower licence fees and taxes and the waiving of interest and penalties on the Supreme Court case, which centred on regulatory fees.

Asked if it made sense for Vodafone to remain in India without such a relief package, he said: “It’s fair to say it’s a very critical situation.”

India’s top court upheld a demand from the country’s telecoms department for $13 billion in overdue levies and interest last month, hitting the shares of both Vodafone Idea and rival Bharti Airtel.

Vodafone has clashed with Indian authorities over tax and regulatory issues ever since it entered the country with a $11 billion deal to buy 67% of Hutchison Essar in 2007.

The arrival of new entrant Reliance Jio Infocomm in 2016 added to Vodafone’s problems by sparking a brutal price war.

It responded by combining its operations with Idea Cellular, a deal that closed in 2018.

Read said Vodafone was not committing any more equity to India and the country effectively contributed zero value to the company’s share price. As a result of the ruling, it has written down the value of its stake in the joint venture to zero.

It also owns a stake in Indian tower operator Indus Towers, along with Bharti Airtel.

Vodafone’s shares were up 1.7% at 163 pence at 1040 GMT as investors focused on an upgrade to its earnings forecast rather than India.

Upgraded forecast

The world’s second largest mobile operator reported improving organic revenue growth with signs of improvement in Spain and Italy and as it integrates a German cable acquisition.

It said organic service revenue rose 0.3% in the first half, as it returned to growth in the second quarter, while organic core earnings rose 1.4%.

It increased its forecast for adjusted core earnings to 14.8-15.0 billion euros from its previous forecast of 13.8-14.2 billion euros, but said India and lower cash flows following the sale of assets in New Zealand meant free cash flow would be “around” 5.4 billion euros, rather than the “at least” 5.4 billion euros previously forecast.

Apart from India, Read said he was pleased with progress.

“This is reflected in our return to top-line growth in the second quarter, which we expect to build upon in the second half of the year in both Europe and Africa,” he said.

Read cut Vodafone’s dividend for the first time in May after tough market conditions and a need to invest in its networks and airwaves caused him to backtrack on his pledge not to reduce the payout.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the disqualification of the 17 Congress-JD (S) MLAs of Karnataka by then Assembly speaker K R Ramesh Kumar.

The top court, however, set aside the Speaker’s decision barring the disqualified MLAs from contesting elections till the end of the current Assembly’s term, saying the Speaker was empowered not to do so, LiveLaw reported.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

A three-judge bench of justices N V Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna and Krishna Murari had on October 25 reserved its verdict on the petitions filed by these disqualified MLAs.

Kumar had disqualified these 17 MLAs of ruling the Congress-JD(S) coalition ahead of a trust vote in July.

The then chief minister H D Kumaraswamy had resigned after losing the trust vote, which paved the way for the BJP-led government in the state under B S Yediyurappa.

By-polls to 15 out of these 17 assembly seats which fell vacant following the disqualification of MLAS are scheduled on December 5 and candidates are required to file their nomination papers between November 11 and November 18.

The disqualified MLAs had recently approached the apex court seeking a direction to the Election Commission to postpone the assembly by-polls for these 15 seats till the pronouncement of verdict in the matter.

Some of the disqualified MLAs had argued in the apex court that they have an “indefeasible right” to resign as members of the assembly and the decision by the then Speaker to disqualify them smacks of “vengeance” and “mala fide”.

During the arguments in the matter, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Karnataka Congress, had contended that the then Speaker, who was the master of the Assembly, had exercised his jurisdiction to disqualify these MLAs and his decision cannot be questioned.

Sibal had also submitted that “the matter needs to be referred to a Constitution bench as it raises matters of grave constitutional importance”.

The incumbent Karnataka Assembly Speaker had earlier told the top court that he has no difficulty in hearing these 17 MLAs and take a “fresh call” on the issue.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the office of the Karnataka Assembly Speaker, had submitted that under the scheme of Constitution, a lawmaker has a right to resign and the Speaker should accept it. The current Assembly Speaker is V Hegde Kageri.

(With PTI inputs)

Khloe Kardashian was left apologizing after she didn’t realize she’d won a major honor at the E! People’s Choice Awards and failed to acknowledge her fans.

Kardashian won the Reality TV Star of 2019 award at Sunday’s presentation in Los Angeles ― but apparently didn’t realize it when she took the stage with sisters Kim and Kourtney Kardashian, and mom Kris Jenner, to accept the prize in another category, Reality Show of 2019.

Khloe stood silently behind her family members, failing to acknowledge or thank fans who voted for her in the individual contest, and many who vented on Twitter took it personally.

“Bitch we ain’t voting next year if you just gon stand up there and not say shit @khloekardashian,” wrote one. 

Kardashian later acknowledged her mistake and explained how it happened. 

“It’s so beyond loud in there. I had no idea I won an individual award until we walked off stage,” she tweeted. “I feel so badly right now. I am so fucking grateful and appreciative! I can’t believe I didn’t say anything but I didn’t hear that I won until after.” 

When another fan tweeted at her about nerves, Kardashian added: “Nerves yes but I literally didn’t know until after lol I still feel so badly about it. I love you guys so much.” 

Before the awards show even started, sisters Kim and Kourtney Kardashian had a bit of a sticky situation with Giuliana Rancic on the red carpet. 

It’s tough to keep up!

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is getting flak online after a 2018 report on his government’s purchase of air purifiers began recirculating. The criticism comes as the government’s air quality monitor, SAFAR, said on Wednesday that pollution levels in Delhi-NCR were expected to enter the “severe plus” or “emergency” category.

Delhi’s air quality had slipped into the ‘severe’ category on Tuesday.

The comments are based on a Reuters report from March 2018 which quoted government data to say the Centre had spent Rs 36 lakh to buy air purifiers for Modi’s offices and at least six central departments between 2014 and 2017.

The outrage is fuelled by comments made by Modi government’s ministers whose solutions to combat air pollution in the capital have included asking people to eat more carrots (health minister Harsh Vardhan!) and starting their day with music (environment minister Prakash Javadekar!).

A UP minister said governments should hold yagyas to please the rain god and set things right.

These perceptive public statements were made when air pollution levels in the capital had emergency levels just three weeks ago, soon after Diwali. 

The story on Modi government’s purchase of air purifiers got traction online on Tuesday when environmentalist Vimlendu Jha tweeted out an India Today link. 

Jha later pointed out that the story temporarily went offline and back online with tweaks. Changes included removing Modi’s name from the headline and his photo.

Meanwhile, Modi hasn’t publicly said anything about the toxic air in the capital and large parts of North India, even as the Supreme Court pulled up the Centre and state governments last week for their inability to curb stubble burning and bring air pollution in Delhi under control.

“You are asking people to die,” the SC bench had said in sharp criticism of the governments.

Modi’s first direct intervention in the matter came on November 7 when he asked the agriculture ministry to distribute equipment to farmers of Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh on a priority basis to tackle stubble burning, Scroll reported.

Stubble burning in neighbouring states is among the main reasons the noxious haze returned to Delhi and its suburbs on Tuesday, PTI reported.

Two days ago, Deepak Chahar’s six wicket haul against Bangladesh helped India win the third and final T20 International by 30 runs. The pacer’s haul also included a hat-trick and BCCI celebrated the feat with a tweet. 

Several Twitter users and other reports did a fact check for BCCI and reminded the cricket body of Ekta Bisht.  

As Quint’s report said, Chahar is the first Indian man to achieve a hat-trick in the shortest format of the game. The first Indian, however, to do this was Ekta Bisht for the Indian Women’s Team. 

She achieved the feat in 2012 in a T20I against Sri Lanka. 

Other reports (see here and here) also pointed out the problem with BCCI’s tweet.

Despite several reports and tweets (see below), BCCI’s tweet, at the time of writing this, is still there.

After the Diwali weekend, Delhi’s air quality is again headed for the “emergency” category on Wednesday morning as a thick blanket of smoke covered the city. 

According to PTI, at 11.30 am, Delhi’s overall air quality index, according to CPCB, read 454. Jahangirpuri and Rohini were the most-polluted areas, the report said, with an AQI of 483, followed by Mundka (479) and Bawana (479).

Faridabad (436), Ghaziabad (468), Greater Noida (459), Gurgaon (450) and Noida (469) also had terrible air quality on Wednesday.

An AQI between 201 and 300 is considered ‘poor’, 301-400 ‘very poor’ and 401-500 ‘severe’. An AQI above 500 falls in the ‘severe plus’ category.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

For the second time in a fortnight, the Supreme Court has criticised the government over poor air quality that is putting citizens across northern parts of India under risk.

NDTV tickers quoted the Supreme Court as saying, “The whole of north India is suffering, and little was being done as a solution.”

The apex court took suo motu cognizance of the situation and sent a notice to the Centre. 

The Centre meanwhile told the court that it was “exploring technology” from Japan as a solution to the air pollution emergency in India. The court asked the Centre to explore this technology and submit a report by 3 December.  

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal said on Wednesday that odd-even scheme may be extended if needed given the pollution in the national capital. 

PTI reported weather experts as saying that a drop in temperature and low wind speed has led to this weeks’ poor air quality. The report said that the situation was worsened by clouds that block out the sun. 

While stubble burning season in Haryana and Punjab worsens air pollution in Delhi, the PTI report said SAFAR has predicted the share of stubble burning in Delhi’s pollution to be 22% on Wednesday, it was 25% on Saturday. 

Stubble burning has continued in the two neighbouring states because of lack of financial incentives to farmers. 

On 4 November, the Supreme Court had pulled up the Centre and state governments and authorities saying, “Can we survive in this atmosphere? This is not the way we can survive. No one is safe even inside homes; it is atrocious.”  

The court had said, “Delhi is choking every year and we are not able to do anything. Question is that every year this is happening. It cannot be done in a civilised country”.

The Supreme Court noted that every year the governments cried hoarse about crop burning in Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh but did nothing about it.

“Why is there unabated crop burning every year? Every year there is hue and cry. States know this but still they are not tackling this issue,” the court asked.

The court also criticised the state governments saying they were only interested in politics.

“They are only interested in electioneering. They have no responsibility towards their own people… Everybody is interested in gimmicks and elections,” the Supreme Court had said. 

(With PTI inputs)

A “Friends’ reunion may soon be there for you ― amazing news, “I KNOW!”

The cast may be getting back together for an unscripted reunion special on HBO Max, according to multiple outlets, including The Hollywood Reporter, which first broke the news. The reunion would feature the whole gang ― Jennifer Aniston (Rachel Green), Courteney Cox (Monica Geller), Lisa Kudrow (Phoebe Buffay), David Schwimmer (Ross Geller), Matt LeBlanc (Joey Tribbiani) and Matthew Perry (Chandler Bing) ― as well as the show’s creators, David Crane and Marta Kauffman. 

According to THR and Deadline, talks are underway for the reunion, which would help launch “Friends” reruns on HBO Max, but the show is still very much in the planning stages and a deal is far from done.

THR also pointed out that there is always a chance that talks could fizzle and the concept could fall apart. “Friends” is scheduled to depart Netflix and make the move to HBO Max in 2020.

HBO did not immediately return a request for comment from HuffPost.

This year is the 25th anniversary of the mega-hit TV show, and Kauffman had said during a September anniversary panel at the Tribeca TV and Film Festival that there were no plans for a reboot or reunion show, reiterating the sentiment shared by some of the cast members: “It’s not going to beat what we did.”

However, a rare recent reunion of the whole gang shared on Instagram by Aniston suggests the cast has been, at least, catching up. Cox also shared an image of herself and her on-screen husband Perry saying the two had grabbed lunch.

Aniston also alluded to something being in the works when she appeared on “The Ellen DeGeneres Show” last month. She began by saying there would not be a reboot of the show, but then added: “Would love for there to be something, but we don’t know what that something is. So we’re just trying. We’re working on something.”

Here’s hoping they pivot and bring “Friends” back.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that the Office of Chief Justice of India comes under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The top court upheld the judgment of the the Delhi High Court. “Transparency does not undermine judicial independence. Judicial independence and accountability go hand-in-hand. Disclosure is a facet of public interest,” Live Law quoted Justice Sanjiv Khanna as saying. 

On 10 January, 2010, the High Court had held that the office of the chief justice of India comes within the ambit of the RTI law, saying judicial independence was not a judge’s privilege, but a responsibility cast upon him.

A five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court had on 4 April reserved its verdict on the appeals filed in 2010 by the Supreme Court secretary general and its central public information officer against the high court and the central information commission’s (CIC’s) orders.

(With PTI inputs)

Parents of Fathima Latheef, the IIT-Madras student who died by suicide, on Tuesday alleged harassment by faculty was the cause of their daughter’s death and asked the Kerala government to intervene in the case, Malayala Manorama reported. They have submitted a petition to CM Pinarayi Vijayan to this effect.

The 18-year-old, a first-year student in the humanities stream at IIT-M, was found hanging from a ceiling fan in her hostel room, police told PTI on Saturday.

For the latest news and more, follow HuffPost India on Twitter, Facebook, and subscribe to our newsletter.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Fathima’s father Abdul Latheef said his wife had been trying to reach their daughter on the phone and also through various phone numbers of her friends on Saturday.  She, however, found out about her daughter’s death through the hostel warden later, The NewsMinute reported.

Abdul said Fathima’s phone had not been included as evidence by the police.

Fathima’s sister Aysha told TNM that phone was lying at the police station when the family arrived. “They had not even switched it on. I took it and when I removed the lock screen, I saw this note on the screensaver,” she told the news site. 

The screensaver had a message asking them to check the notes on her tablet, where they found evidence of harassment by the faculty, Abdul said. It mentioned the names of three professors, he said.

“This is a repeat of Rohit Vemula. I possess all records to prove that my daughter was being harassed by the department for the past 28 days. She has named faculty members in her notes. I do not know what sort of harassment she was facing there. Whether it was mental, or otherwise, I will fight till my last breath to get bring those who harassed her to justice,” Abdul told TNM.

In its statement on Saturday, IIT Madras expressed grief and sadness over the student’s death and said, “IIT Madras faculty, staff and students extend their deepest condolences to the family, friends and other near and dear ones of the deceased student. This is indeed an irreparable loss to the institute and the family. May her soul rest in peace.”

Dramatic photos and video captured in Venice this week show rain-booted tourists and residents wading through the flooded streets and alleyways of the Italian city. Some said they’d been forced to essentially swim through the City of Canals after it was inundated by the highest tide Venice has seen in more than 50 years.

Mayor Luigi Brugnaro, who said he would declare a state of disaster over the flooding, blamed climate change for the “devastating” acqua alta, or high waters, which peaked at over 6 feet on Tuesday night.

“The situation is dramatic,” Brugnaro said on Twitter, per a Reuters translation. The exceptionally high tide “is going to leave an indelible wound,” he added. 

The city’s famed Saint Mark’s Square was deluged by more than 3 feet of water, and Saint Mark’s Basilica was flooded for only the sixth time in 1,200 years, Reuters reported.

Four of the church’s floodings have occurred in the last 20 years, the outlet reported. 

The Guardian, citing La Stampa, said at least two people have died in the Venice floods. A man was reportedly fatally electrocuted after floodwaters rushed into his home, and the body of another man was found in his home.  

Heavy rains have battered swathes of Italy in recent days, bringing flood conditions to many parts of the country. The deluge forced schools in many southern cities including Taranto and Matera to close, AFP reported.

More bad weather is expected in the coming days, meteorologists have warned.