Slew of social infrastructure projects commissioned in Oulgaret
Various projects executed at an estimated cost of ₹16.72 crore were commissioned during a function at the Pavana Nagar park in Oulgaret.
Chief Minister N. Rangasamy said these schemes reflected the government's thrust on welfare schemes for the low-income strata. Pointing out that many of the projects dedicated to the public had been pending completion for long, the Chief Minister said the government was not just earmarking funds for civic schemes but also ensuring their fruition.
Speaker R. Selvam, MLAs M. Vaithianathan and M. Sivasankar, Local Administration Secretary R. Kesavan, Director S. Shakthyvel and Oulgaret Commissioner A. Suresh Raj were among those who participated.
The important projects, included concrete road works in Jeevanandapuram and Weavers' Settlement within Lawspet limits, construction of roads, drainage and parks in Pavana Nagar, Jawahar Nagar, cremation platforms for crematoriums in Palakkaranjavady, Shanmugapuram and Mettupalayam and improvements to the link road to Lambert Saravana Nagar EWS housing project area from Villianur Main Road (NH) and First to Fourth Cross Road at Sudhagar Nagar, Reddiyarpalayam.
A park, playground and a compound wall of Slum Board EWS Housing Project Site at Jawahar Nagar, Boomianpet and provision of LPG crematorium in the burial grounds at Shanmugapuram and Pavazhakaranchavady and modernisation of the facility at Mettupalayam were other initiatives.
Meanwhile, a press note said with the rapid expansion of urban areas in Oulgaret, people's expectations were also on the rise. The Oulgaret Municipality currently has a population of about 45 lakh and comprises seven Assembly constituencies and 42 wards. Within municipal limits are a central university, engineering colleges, veterinary hospital, government medical college, Kendra Vidyalaya, arts colleges and industrial parks.
The completed projects were part of the detailed plans drawn up by Oulgaret Municipality to develop social infrastructure in low-income settlements to the tune of ₹18.49 crore under CITIIS 2.0, a sub-component of the Smart Cities Mission.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
8 hours ago
- NDTV
Joking Hazards: How A Karnataka Bill Could Kill Online Parody, Satire
AI's integration on platforms, such as X's Grok, as a truth-seeking tool is starkly different from its use in altered content generation. This has given AI a dual role. This duality, where AI acts as a fact finder and a fact fabricator, has added layers of complexity for lawmakers. This is particularly important for the applicability of extant regulation to AI, with the emergence of unrelated laws that have already cast a long arm over its use. One of the more complex challenges here is that AI-generated falsehoods often don't arise from intent to deceive, but from how the models are trained to predict and produce language. AI tools exhibit a form of truth-bias, traditionally seen as a uniquely human trait. This refers to the cognitive tendency to assume that most interpersonal communication is honest. A series of studies have shown that large language models are even more likely to accept and reproduce false information unless prompted otherwise. Crucially, this bias is not the result of design, but a byproduct of training on vast human corpora where truthful statements are statistically dominant. This raises a pertinent question: when AI-generated content perpetuates a falsehood without intent, should its end-generator be held criminally liable? Intent must remain central to legal culpability. Karnataka's latest Misinformation and Fake News (Prohibition) Bill, 2025, is a case in point. The Bill stands on shaky constitutional ground. It ventures into a domain arguably reserved for the Union Government. Entry 31 of the Union List grants Parliament exclusive power over "posts and telegraphs; telephones, wireless, broadcasting and other like forms of communication". Regulating internet-based speech falls squarely within this ambit, raising serious questions about the state legislature's competency to enact such a law in the first place. Even if the issue of jurisdiction is kept aside, the Bill's substance is deeply flawed. While it cedes any reference to AI or synthetic media, its broad definitions of 'fake news' and 'misinformation' could be interpreted in ways that unintentionally criminalise AI-generated content in its many forms, or other forms of digital creativity. The bill defines 'fake news' broadly to include 'misquotation', 'editing audio or video which results in the distortion of facts', and 'purely fabricated content'. Yet it fails to distinguish between malicious deception and legitimate creative expression, particularly that which uses AI for satire, parody, or commentary. A voice-dubbed parody of a political sermon, even if clearly labelled as satire, could be construed under the bill as 'distorted' or 'fabricated' and made liable to prosecution. Critically, the bill's carve-out for satire and parody applies only under the definition of 'misinformation,' not under 'fake news,' which is governed by stricter penalties and lacks any protections for artistic or humorous work. This is precisely the kind of ambiguity the Supreme Court sought to guard against in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), when it struck down Section 66A of the IT Act. The court held that vague and overbroad language could restrict our freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a). The judgment warned that unless laws specify clearly what kind of speech is punishable, creators will be forced into a culture of self-censorship. Internationally, democracies are developing more targeted and technologically aware regulations that offer better models. The European Union's AI Act, for example, focuses on transparency. It mandates that AI-generated deepfakes and other synthetic content that might be mistaken for authentic must be clearly labelled as such. Crucially, the law provides explicit exceptions for content that is obviously artistic, satirical, or creative, thereby protecting free expression while empowering citizens to identify manipulated media. Similarly, several US states have enacted laws that focus on specific, malicious uses of AI rather than banning the technology itself. Laws in states like California and Texas criminalise the creation and distribution of deceptive deepfake videos of political candidates intended to influence an election, but they are narrowly tailored, often applying only within a short period before voting. This approach aims to reduce high-stake harm, such as election interference, without imposing a blanket ban on altered content. The Karnataka Bill ignores such nuanced approaches, opting instead for a blunt instrument that threatens to criminalise a wide range of digital creativity. This legislative approach is especially unjust in a legal system that values precedent and practical interpretation. The legal maxim ignorantia juris non excusat, or that ignorance of the law is no excuse, only deepens the challenge for creators using new tools. If creators are to be held liable for violating a law, they must first understand what conduct is permitted. To be clear, the dangers of deepfakes and deceptive synthetic content are real. They can be used to damage reputation or manipulate public opinion. However, the solution cannot be to criminalise 'fake news' without regard for intent, context or creative purpose. Karnataka's policy makers would do well to recall that a well-formed legislature, as legal theorist Richard Ekins puts it, acts with the intent 'to change the law in the chosen way, for the common good'. That common good must balance the need to curb digital deception with the imperative to protect expression, even (and especially) when that expression is critical, satirical, or inconvenient. There is an imminent need to reconsider this bill.
The Hindu
10 hours ago
- The Hindu
Conviction rate improved in the U.T. after three new criminal laws came into effect: Puducherry Chief Minister
The conviction rate has increased in the Union Territory after the three new criminal laws — the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam — came into effect in July last year, Chief Minister N. Rangasamy said here on Tuesday. Participating in a programme organised by the Police department to commemorate the first anniversary of replacing the Indian Penal Code with the three criminal laws, the Chief Minister said out of 654 cases instituted by the courts in Puducherry, 337 had been disposed. As many as 319 cases had resulted in conviction with the overall conviction rate pegged at 95% for the Union Territory against 75% in old criminal laws, he said. 'The new laws have been successfully implemented in Puducherry and the law and order situation has also improved. The police should take all necessary steps to maintain the present status of the Union Territory being a peaceful region,' he said. Home Minister A. Namassivayam in his address said the Police department had recruited 680 personnel to the force after the AINRC-BJP government came to power. Steps were being taken to recruit 200 maritime home guards and fill 74 posts of sub-inspectors, he said. Minister for Law K. Lakshminarayanan said the implementation of any new law would encounter 'teething problems.' However, the criminal laws were an exception as the implementation was smooth. The 'well-crafted laws' were debated properly in the Parliament for almost two years before being passed, he said. Speaker R. Selvam, DMK legislator Anibal Kennedy, Chief Secretary Sharat Chauhan and Director General of Police Shalini Singh were also present.
Hindustan Times
21 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Chandigarh: Vigilance to probe ₹100-crore community centre booking scam
The UT administration's vigilance department will probe the alleged ₹ 100-crore community centre booking scam, municipal commissioner Amit Kumar confirmed during the General House meeting on Monday. BJP councillor showing posters of illegal vendors during the General House meeting at the MC office in Sector 17, Chandigarh, on Monday. (Keshav Singh/HT) This comes nearly a month after the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) had alleged large-scale irregularities in the exemption-based booking system meant for economically weaker sections (EWS). Families below the poverty line (BPL) can book community centres for weddings free of cost, provided they are recommended by their area councillor. It is the councillor's responsibility to verify the financial condition of the applicant before recommending such a concession. AAP leaders had claimed that there was a nexus of middlemen, who with the help of fake councillor endorsements and municipal staff, were manipulating the booking process to illegally charge poor families between ₹ 26,000 and ₹ 55,000 per booking. AAP spokesperson and city councillor Yogesh Dhingra, while raising the issue, had alleged: 'Middlemen take money from poor people but get the bookings done for free of cost. We demand a complete record of all community centre bookings for the last five years; details of each booking: name, date, purpose, and fees; all files where councillor recommendations or approvals are attached; forensic investigation report on forged signatures and stamps; file movement trail and internal notings of the booking branch; and identification of guilty officials.' Stating that the local government department has formally written to the vigilance department, requesting a thorough probe, the MC chief said, 'The entire booking record, including the role of councillors in verifying these cases, will be probed.' Booking branch staff shifted After the AAP leaders' claims, mayor Harpreet Kaur Babla had asked the municipal commissioner to initiate a formal vigilance inquiry and transferred all staff working in the MC booking branch. In a preliminary report tabled by MC officials, it was revealed that a majority of free bookings between January 1, 2024, and May 31, 2025, came from wards represented by councillors Neha (AAP), Kuldeep Kumar Dhalor (AAP), Suman Devi (AAP), Ram Chander Yadav (AAP), Harpreet Kaur (BJP) and Kanwarjeet Singh (BJP), among others. Responding to the scrutiny, former mayor and AAP councillor Dhalor defended the councillors' actions. 'Most of these bookings are from areas dominated by EWS populations such as colonies and villages. Recommendations were made only after due verification. We welcome the inquiry,' he said. 'New booking policy deferred again' Meanwhile, the MC House has again deferred the much-delayed proposal for a new community centre booking policy, which has been pending since December 2024. The proposal seeks to revise booking charges and standardise exemptions. If approved, Category A centres—currently priced at ₹ 44,000—will see a 36% hike to ₹ 60,000. Category B centres will jump from ₹ 22,000 to ₹ 40,000, and Category C centres, which previously ranged from ₹ 5,000 to ₹ 22,000, will cost between ₹ 15,000 and ₹ 30,000. The original proposal also recommended eliminating free bookings for any purpose, including marriages and religious ceremonies, arguing that even subsidised users should pay at least 50% of the cost due to mounting maintenance expenses. However, this was rejected by the MC's committee. The revised proposal now retains exemptions for marriages of BPL families, medical and blood donation camps, UT/MC official events, and meetings held by RWAs, senior citizens' groups, and pensioners' associations. HOUSE AGENDAS Approved: The House approved the auction of over 7.5 acres across five plots in Pocket Number 6 of Manimajra, paving the way for a multi-storey group housing society. The cumulative reserve price for plots crosses ₹ 794 crore. As per the plan, the land can be allotted either jointly to a consortium or to a single developer. Deferred: The House deferred the proposal to finalise the new terms and conditions to hire a private firm for GIS-based mechanised and manual sweeping in Southern sectors. The firm, M/s Lion Services Ltd, that currently has the contract for the job has got a three-month extension. Rejected: The House rejected former mayor Anup Gupta's appeal to restart the allotment process for the city's much-needed horticulture waste plan. Gupta had in May alleged that MC bypassed proper tendering procedures and unlawfully nominated M/s Hardicon Limited, a PSU, for the job without issuing any expression of interest or request for proposal. Following this, MC tabled a fresh request for proposal in the House on Monday, detailing terms and conditions for re-tendering. However, city councillors resolved to continue the hiring of PSU for the role. Demanding 'open auction', Gupta, supported by another BJP councillor Kanwarjeet Rana, added their dissent for the project and its allotment.
