Defence PSUs black out websites for security reasons
Ordnance Factory Board
(OFB) were blacked out on Thursday. This is an impact of
Operation Sindoor
, as the management does not want to take any chances with security, said sources. The websites contained details of the units, their locations, and the products manufactured by each of the companies.Nagpur is the headquarters of
Yantra India Limited
, a major producer of mechanical items.
The TOI checked its website, and it could not be opened. Similarly, the websites belonging to Munitions India Limited (MIL), Advanced Weapons and Equipment Limited (AWEL), and Armoured Vehicles Nigam Limited (AVNL) were also not accessible from personal devices.Seven public sector undertakings were formed in 2021 out of the 41 ordnance factories. As PSUs, the corporations are required to maintain their financial self-sufficiency.
Operation Sindoor
'Did not want to...': Pak def min gives absurd excuse for army's failure to withstand Op Sindoor
Blackouts, sirens & Pak's failed attacks: 10 things that happened in the last 36 hrs
'1971 war was not remotely as terrifying': Residents of border areas shell-shocked
Each of the companies built their own websites, also showcasing their products. The companies were also eyeing export markets.The PSUS have been formed on the basis of items made by the factories. As public corporation the factories must maintain profitability which can come from orders by Indian defence forces as well as friendly countries, said sources.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
12 minutes ago
- Business Standard
India's liquidity surplus unlikely to lift credit growth, says JP Morgan
Bank lending to the Indian economy may not see a meaningful boost despite the large liquidity surplus in the banking system, economists at J.P. Morgan said in a report on Friday. While surplus liquidity influences overnight borrowing costs, a recent analysis by the firm showed it does not impact credit or deposit growth in the economy. The Indian central bank has cut rates steeply and flooded the banking system with liquidity since December as it sought to counter signs of a slowdown in the Indian economy amid modest inflation. The Reserve Bank of India has said it hopes the combination of rate cuts and easy liquidity would help transmit lower interest rates across the economy and prompt individuals and firms to borrow more. Bank credit growth slipped to below 10 per cent in May. "We find that the role of liquidity in boosting monetary policy transmission occurs primarily through influencing overnight market rates, within the policy corridor," J.P. Morgan economists Toshi Jain, Sajjid Z Chinoy and Divyanit Sood said in the study dated July 4. "There is no evidence of a 'credit channel' on deposit and lending growth beyond this." The economists added that the findings suggest the central bank should inject or withdraw only as much liquidity as needed to keep overnight rates aligned with the policy repo rate, adding that excess liquidity operations have no independent effect on credit growth. A large surplus of liquidity in the Indian market pushed overnight rates down to below the policy repo rate in recent months and, in some cases, even below the floor of the interest rate corridor. The RBI withdrew 1 trillion rupees ($11.7 billion) from the banking system on Friday through a seven-day variable rate reverse repo, rolling over an operation from last week, to ensure rates don't fall too low. India's policy repo rate, the mid-point of the corridor, stands at 5.50 per cent, while the standing deposit facility (SDF) rate, the floor of the corridor, is at 5.25 per cent. "Pushing up the overnight rate will constitute a tightening of monetary policy at a delicate time. Yet, eventually, the sanctity of the operating target will need to be adhered to," J.P. Morgan economists said.
The Hindu
13 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Cultural appropriation isn't just colonial, it's casteist
When Italian luxury house Prada recently unveiled its version of the Kolhapuri chappal, Indian social media was quick to react. Accusations of cultural appropriation and erasure followed, accompanied by demands for proper attribution and a wider call to 'decolonise fashion'. But what if the cultural erasure didn't start with Prada, or with the West? What if the deeper, older story is not just about colonial appropriation, but about caste-based appropriation from within? Beneath the Indian diaspora's outrage lies a deeper, more uncomfortable truth: the issue isn't just about what is being borrowed, but who gets to borrow and who doesn't. The Kolhapuri controversy exposes not only colonial legacies but also the casteist dynamics embedded within India's cultural economy. Not just Indian, but Dalit in origin Originating in Maharashtra's Kolhapur region and its neighbouring districts, the Kolhapuri chappal is known for its durability and distinct structure. What is less commonly discussed is who makes them. Historical accounts of Kolhapuri craftsmanship often mention specific sub-castes such as the Chamar, Dhor, and Matang: scheduled caste communities historically assigned the task of leatherwork, a practice stigmatised due to its contact with animal hides. These artisans, often from marginalised backgrounds, tan, dye, and stitch the leather by hand, creating a product celebrated for its durability and aesthetic. Yet, mainstream narratives often generalise Kolhapuris as a 'Maharashtrian' or 'Indian' craft, erasing the caste-specific labour behind them. Appropriation marketed as 'revival' Within India, cultural appropriation often wears the mask of reverence. Many Indian artforms, textiles, jewellery, and crafts originate from Dalit-Adivasi aesthetics, labour, and design but commercialised by upper caste (Savarna) owned businesses. When a luxury Indian label collaborates with artisans, it is seen as uplifting tradition. But these collaborations rarely involve co-authorship or equity. Artisans are paid per piece. Designs are owned by the brand. The origin story is softened into a marketing stunt. While artisans toil for minimal wages, the profits and prestige accrue to brands. Artisans, often from marginalised social backgrounds, form the backbone of India's handicraft sector but lack control over branding or distribution. Savarna designers and brands act as gatekeepers, curating and profiting from these crafts while framing their role as 'saviours of craft'. Who owns the means of design? Indian fashion runways feature designers predominantly from Savarna castes. The narratives in Indian fashion are largely shaped by editorials run by upper-caste surnames. The leadership roles in the Indian fashion and textile sector are disproportionately represented by upper castes. Meanwhile, Bahujans remain largely invisible in decision-making roles, often limited to labour roles. Their labour, when filtered through a Savarna designer's lens, becomes 'art.' When done independently, it remains 'ethnic' or 'rural.' Many traditional artisans lack access to formal design education, capital investment, or English-language fluency. Such barriers make it difficult for Bahujans to participate in the elite circuits of fashion. Bahujans are often reduced to tokenistic roles: a one season's showstopper or a lookbook model, to signal performative inclusivity without ceding power. Bahujans are rarely seen in leadership roles, such as creative directors or brand owners, yet their identity is exploited in marketing campaigns that romanticise their poverty and struggles as 'hardwork' or 'heritage.' This tokenism commodifies Bahujan struggle while denying them agency, perpetuating a cycle where their labour is celebrated, but their voices are silenced. The diaspora and the blind spot The Indian diaspora's calls to decolonise fashion often overlook these internal caste hierarchies. This blind spot is telling. National pride tends to eclipse caste critique. In calling out foreign appropriation, many forget to examine who within India controls narrative, capital, and authorship. The act is the same. The reaction shifts from outrage to celebration depending on who borrows and who gets to author the narrative. What cultural equity actually requires The question isn't whether Kolhapuris or any Indian craft should evolve. They must. But the more urgent question is: who gets to decide how they evolve? Who profits? Who gets cited in design schools and magazines, and who remains a footnote? True cultural equity is about fair wages, credit, representation in leadership roles and platforms for co-authorship in design and storytelling which rebalance historic exclusion. The Prada-Kolhapuri controversy is more than a clash over sandals; it's a mirror reflecting how global and local systems both flatten the histories of marginalised makers while uplifting those with socio-economic capital. Within the Indian fashion ecosystem, the intersections of caste and class dictate who gets to be the 'designer' and who remains the uncredited, underpaid and exploited 'artisan.' Until credit, compensation, and representation are equitably shared, cultural appropriation — whether by Prada or privileged Indian elites — will remain a form of theft, rooted in both colonial and casteist legacies. The writer is a Chennai based fashion designer, artist and educator
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
SEBI Jane Street scandal: How retail investors can protect themselves
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has recently cracked down on Jane Street, a US based trading giant. The crackdown is to do with alleged manipulation of Indian financial markets and profiting unfairly. The total profit garnered as per the SEBI report is of ₹ 36,502 crore. SEBI's interim order against Jane Street clearly reveals how expiry day trades can be engineered to distort and create complexities in index movements. This case highlights the very serious hidden risks retail investors face in the rapidly evolving, fast moving algorithm driven equity markets. Source: Sebi order link: (Page 10 of the SEBI order) The SEBI order charges Jan Street Group with the manipulation of equity indices. This has been done under SEBI Act Sections 11(1), 11(4), 11B(1), 11(D) and PFUTP Regulations. PFUTP stands for Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices. These provisions are discussed in order. Hence, as the case continues to unfold, here are five key takeaways for retail investors: 1. Big players can influence the market — Stay informed: Jane Street's alleged 'pump and dump' tactics on expiry days showcase how easily large trades distort market levels. Retail investors and traders must take note of this fact that indices may not always show a clear reflection of genuine market sentiment, even more so during high volatility periods such as derivatives expiry. 2. Don't blindly follow index movements: SEBI noted that Jane Street's actions gave a misleading and false sense of bullishness in Nifty50 and Bank Nifty. This highlights the need for retail investors to avoid impulsive trades based on sudden index fluctuations and instead use technical indicators or volume data to carefully check and validate trends. 3. Understand how expiry day manipulation works: The alleged rigging involved large scale strategic buying and selling to move index levels on expiry days, thus influencing option prices. That is why if you trade options be extremely cautious around expiry. Sudden moves may not be driven by fundamental market strength but by large institutional strategies. 4. Watch for SEBI advisories and warnings: Earlier SEBI had already warned Jane Street in February 2025. As a prudent retail investor in this case you should always keep an eye on such regulatory red flags. SEBI's website, circulars, notices, along with financial news can all cumulatively offer early warning signs about irregular market behaviour or risk in the equity markets. That is why consistent monitoring, reading and building knowledge is the best way to keep yourself safe in such an environment. 5. Regulators do act — But vigilance is key: This case highlights SEBI's increasing scrutiny of foreign entities along with the complex strategies deployed by them to make money in the Indian equity market. Given regulators act in sincere public interest, the onus is on investors to stay cautious, avoid FOMO i.e.,the fear of missing out, keep themselves away from greedy F&O trades and prioritise risk management to successfully navigate the complexities of the equity markets. Hence, the Jane Street case is a strong wake-up call for retail investors in the country who are busy with emotion based short term trading. Do keep this fact in mind, that in today's data-driven markets, knowledge, patience, and discipline matter more than chasing quick profits. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are for informational purposes only and do not constitute financial or investment advice. Readers are advised to consult with a certified financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
