Ngod Telangana: Disgruntled leader tells Madigas not for Congress in LS polls
Hard work is often seen as the way to success, but one young beggar in Ajmer Sharif, Uttar Pradesh, took a very different route. He managed to buy an iPhone 16 Pro Max entirely through begging. Identified as Sheikh, a video of him has gone viral on the internet with many questioning his chosen path to attain materialistic wealth. A physically disabled person, Sheikh tells his interviewer he paid Rs 1.70 lakh in cash at the Apple Store to get his new mobile. Paisa kahaan se aaya where did the money for buying iPhone come from , the interviewer asks the beggar. Maang ke through begging , quips Sheikh. The story has left the internet s
stanley mexico urprised and curious. While man
stanley cup y people chose the traditional route of studying well and earning a good salaried job to afford their dreams, Sheikhs unusual method has sparked debate about ambition and effort. A video of a beggar carrying an iPhone 16 Pro Max in Ajmer, Rajasthan has surfa
stanley cup ced on the internet. The alms seeker 39 response to a particular question has amused netizens. pic.twitter/buFnD0ZoGEmdash; The Siasat Daily @TheSiasatDaily January 19, 2025 Reacting to the video one of the social media users said, Best business, no investment, no job, security issues, no rigorous hard work, no stress, no dependency, aish hi aish. Another comment on the video read, Beggars are doing well here than normal middle class. Another person said, Promise yourself to hel Kgxo WhatsApp will stop working on these android phones
New Delhi: The Supreme Court, on the 14th day of the hearing of the pleas against the ab
stanley cup usa rogation of Article 370 on Friday, was told that the decision to revoke the constitutional provision was not solely made by the political executive but had the backing of the Parliament. Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for intervenor Ashwini Upadhyay, said that the word recommendation ; in Article 370 indicated that the consent of the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir was not required for its abrogation. He argued that the entire Parliament, including Members of Parlia
stanley us ment from Jammu and Kashmir, had been consulted and had given their consent to the move. Dwivedi argued that the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir had certain limitations during the framing of its constitution, unlike the Constituent Asse
stanley canada mbly of India. He said that the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly was bound by various factors, including the Indian Constitution, the principles of justice, liberty, fraternity, and Article 1, which defined the territory of India. He argued that Article 370 was always intended to be a temporary provision and that the speeches of Dr. BR Ambedkar, N.G. Ayyangar, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Gulzarilal Nanda indicated that the ultimate goal was the complete integration of Jammu and Kashmir with other Indian states. Dwivedi further contended that Article 370 was mentioned in the Indian Constitution as a temporary and transitional provision. He said that
