 |
|
| Tuesday,
May 8, 2001, Chandigarh, India
|
|
||||
New varieties
released Ludhiana, May 7 Dr M.S. Bajwa, Director (Research), PAU, disclosed that the new maize variety is a short duration single cross hybrid of maize. The variety has good level of drought tolerance and recommended for rainfed cultivation and average soil fertility under irrigated conditions. Regarding new cotton variety, he said, this variety had been among the top five ranking entries in the All-India Coordinated Trials from 1995-1997. It had big boll size 2.60 g and was comparatively more tolerant to fusarium wilt, bacterial blight and boll rot than check varieties. He also said it is resistant to cotton
jassid, a pest. It gave average yield of 1610 kg/ha in farmers’ fields and 1891 kg/ha in the research farms which was 21.1 per cent and 31.1 per cent higher than the existing cotton varieties, LD 327 and LD 491, respectively. Doctor Bajwa said due to its high yield, better ginning outturn and more tolerance to fusarium wilt and bacterial blight, LD 694, would be acceptable to farmers. |
|
Compensation meagre: BKU Samrala, May 7 Mr Rajewal termed compensation at Rs 2000 per acre a cruelty on farmers. This amount did not meet the expenses of fertilisers used per acre and the mental torture the farmers and their families had to face could not be compensated, he added. Mr Rajewal alleged that the employees of the PSEB did nothing except raising slogans and work culture in the PSEB had vanished. This was the reason for the increase in the number of incidents of damage to wheat crop due to short circuits every year. |
PAUTA’s decision to
move court flayed Ludhiana, May 7 Dr R.K. Batra and Dr R.S. Brar, former president and secretary, respectively, of the PAUTA have alleged in a press note that the reported decision had been taken when only 100 teachers were present in the meeting whereas the PAUTA constitution clearly envisages that 1/6th of the total members constitutes the quorum of the general body. Thus, for any resolution to be valid the General Body meeting should be attended by at least 200 teachers, they said. Dr Batra and Dr Brar have also accused Dr Hari Singh and Dr M.L. Gupta of denying an opportunity to a number of teachers who wanted to place their point of view before the General House. As a result, many teachers staged a walk-out from the meeting. The two former functionaries of the PAUTA also said instead of filing a case in the High Court, the PAUTA Executive Committee should use other constitutional means to persuade the university’s Board of Management to implement the CAS notification of August 11 which unambiguously specified that the CAS would be made effective retrospectively from January 1, 1996 and the teachers would be eligible for a benefit of total service for promotion under the scheme. Dr Batra and Dr Brar have also alleged that Dr Hari Singh got the controversial resolution rushed through in the General Body at the behest of the PAU authorities who are looking for just an excuse to further delay the process of assessment and promotion of teachers. Accordingly, they have appealed to the PAU teachers to beware of Dr Hari Singh’s designs and refuse to become a party to an illegal suit which may jeopardise their career prospects. They have cautioned the teachers that if a writ petition is filed in the court, the university administration will have sufficient ground to delay their cases under the pretext that the matter is sub
judice. |
|
Sodhi
re-elected PCCTU chief Ludhiana, May 7 Over 300 delegates from 142 colleges of Punjab and Chandigarh participated in the session. The other elected office-bearers were Prof J.S. Randhawa as general secretary, Mr Gurnam Singh Kahlon as vice-president and Prof Balbir Singh as finance secretary. Prof Sukhpal Singh was elected area secretary of Panjab University, Mr Aminderpal Singh as area secretary of Punjabi University and Mr Parkash Singh as area secretary of Guru Nanak Dev University at the annual session. The 11 executive members included Mr K.S. Matharoo, Mr Chander Shekhar, Mr V.K. Bhardwaj, Mr S.S. Hundal, Mr Satish Chander, Mr Kanwaljit Singh, Mr P.K. Sharma, Mr H.S. Walia, Mr J.S. Dadwal, Mr R.S. Brar and Mr S.S. Dhillon. Lala Lajpat Rai, member of Parliament, presided. Meanwhile, the members and the office-bearers of the union demanded an early implementation of the pension gratuity scheme, review of posts in colleges, more budgetary provision for higher education and incentives and promotional avenues for teachers. |
Forum quashes PSEB demand for Rs 32,825 Ludhiana, May 7 According to the complaint, on August 16, 1999, the board officials visited the premises of the consumer to check the electricity connection and gave a report in which it was mentioned that from February to August, 1999, the consumption of the connection was 2649 units and as such the meter should be changed and checked in the
M.E. Laboratory. No tampering with the meter was detected by the officials at that time, the consumer added. About ten days after the checking of the meter, two officials visited the house of the consumer and removed the meter, but they did not pack and seal it properly as per the rules of the
PSEB, the complainant said. It was alleged that the board officials demanded Rs 5,000 and threatened that in case the payment was not made, the complainant would be implicated. The consumer further stated that on January 21, 2000, the consumer received a notice in which Rs 32,825 was demanded on the basis of checking of the meter in the
M.E. Laboratory. Ms Jaswinder Kaur disclosed that she had to deposit Rs 16,415 to avoid disconnection and after that, the matter was referred to the Dispute Settlement Committee. She pointed out that no theft could be proved on the basis of broken seals. She demanded the forum to refund the amount deposited against the disputed demand, along with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum. The PSEB pleaded that after checking the said meter on August 16, 1999, it was found that the consumption from February to August, 1999, was only 2649 units and as such the meter was removed and sent to the laboratory. The respondent denied the allegations of not sealing and packing the meter properly at the time of removing it. The respondent disclosed that after checking of the meter, it was found that
M.E. seals were fake and there was scratches on the digits. The board alleged that the consumer was controlling the consumption of energy and as such, the demand was rightly raised on account of theft of energy. The forum observed that as per the documents produced, there was no evidence to prove that the meter was packed and sealed properly at the time of removing it, which was mandatory as per the rules of the
PSEB. The forum further stated that there was evidence of presence of the consumer at the time of checking the meter in the laboratory and the consumer was not given and notice to be present at the time of checking, which was mandatory. The forum held that the demand was liable to be quashed as it was raised against the rules of the
PSEB.
|
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
