4. Why should there NOT be retirement age of 70 in politics to give impetus to young talent, since over 60% people of India are below 35?
5. You know, of course that: -- the Presidential Elections are violative of articles 14, 21, 54, 55(3), 58, 71(3) and 324 of the Constitution of India. -- Issuing whip to vote a particular candidate is an offense u/s sections 171C and 171F of the IPC. -- Under Article 53 of the Constitution, the President of India is the Executive Head of India & his Election cant become Selection. -- That issuing of Whip in favour of a particular candidate should be prohibited in the Presidential Elections thro a Writ of Prohibition. -- Rules made u/s 5B(a) and 5C(1) of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election Act 1952 are ultra vires to the Constitution. -- According to article 58(b) the President should be 35 years and above (the entry point). But usually they are beyond 70 (the exist point) All this, therefore, also suggests retirement at 70 to politicians so that meritorious young people can prove their worth
6. If our representatives do not reflect the opinion of India, who will? They were elected BY the people, FOR the people and they ought to representatives OF of the people. Shouldn't they?
7. Shekhavat has absolutely no chance and we need to defeat Pratibha Patil for supporting Emergency.
