New railway terminal will be established near Kempegowda International Airport in Bengaluru: Minister Somanna
For the convenience of passengers, a new railway terminal will be established near Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru, said V. Somanna, Minister of State for Railways.
Survey completed
Speaking at a press conference here on Friday, he said that the survey work has already been completed for the implementation of the Circular Railway project to connect the outskirts of Bengaluru city. Under the project, it has been decided to establish railway terminals in four places. One of these terminals will be established near Kempegowda International Airport, he said.
He said railway projects need to be implemented in the light of fast expanding population of Bengaluru.
'After becoming the Railway Minister, I have emphasised completing the old railway projects that were stalled. Karnataka's Minister for Large and Medium Industries, M.B. Patil, is cooperating to implement the Suburban railway project. Earlier, the Union government used to allocate only ₹833 crore to Karnataka for the implementation of railway projects. But now, ₹7,000 to ₹8,000 crores are being provided annually. So, all the old projects will be completed in two to three years. Therefore, the State government should cooperate in the implementation of railway projects. This will lead to the development of the State,' he explained.
Concession to categories
Responding to a question on whether steps will be taken to reinstate concessions in railway ticket prices to senior citizens, persons with disability, and others as before the COVID-19 pandemic, Mr. Somanna said that a request has been submitted to the department. But during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Union government had reduced all types of railway ticket prices by 46%, and therefore, the concessions given to special classes were reduced. He said that he would discuss this issue with the Prime Minister to reinstate these concessions in the wake of public demand.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
27 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
India lost jets in Operation Sindoor due to ‘political constraint': Defence attaché to Indonesia
The Indian Air Force lost fighter jets to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor on May 7 because the political leadership had directed that no military establishment across the border was to be attacked that day, The Times of India quoted India's defence attaché to Indonesia as having said earlier this month. A controversy erupted after a purported video of Captain Shiv Kumar's remarks from June 10 surfaced online on Sunday. Following this, the Indian Embassy in Jakarta stated that the Navy officer had only said that India's armed forces serve under ' civilian political leadership ', unlike some neighbouring countries. 'It was also explained that the objective of Operation Sindoor was to target terrorist infrastructure and the Indian response was non-escalatory,' it added. The Indian Embassy also said that Kumar's remarks were 'quoted out of context' and 'the media reports are a misrepresentation of the intention and thrust of the presentation made by the speaker'. The officer had made the comments while speaking at a seminar titled 'Analysis of the Pakistan-India Air Battle and Indonesia's Anticipatory Strategies from the Perspective of Air Power' at a university in Jakarta. Kumar's statement came more than a month after Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan's May 31 comments that were seen by some as an acknowledgement of the Indian Air Force's loss of aircraft during the operation. General Chauhan had told Bloomberg that what was important was 'not the jet being down, but why they were being down'. The Narendra Modi-led Union government has yet to officially state the number of fighter jets lost during Operation Sindoor. Kumar made the statement in response to Pakistan's claim of having downed six aircraft, including three Rafales. 'I may not agree…that India lost so many aircraft,' The Print quoted him as having said. 'But, I do agree that we did lose some aircraft and that happened only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishments'. Kumar added that the tactics were changed after the loss and 'we went for their military installations'. After a video from the seminar surfaced online, the Congress accused the Union government of having 'misled' the country. Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh, in a social media pos,t asked why the prime minister was 'refusing' to preside over an all-party meeting to take the Opposition into confidence and why the demand for a special session of Parliament has been rejected. He added: 'First the Chief of Defence Staff makes important revelations in Singapore. Then a senior defence official follows up from Indonesia.' Tensions between New Delhi and Islamabad escalated on May 7 when the Indian military carried out strikes – codenamed Operation Sindoor – on what it claimed were terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The strikes were in response to the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam, which killed 26 persons on April 22. The Pakistan Army retaliated to Indian strikes by repeatedly shelling Indian villages along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir. At least 22 Indian civilians and eight defence personnel were killed in the shelling. India and Pakistan on May 10 reached an 'understanding' to halt firing following the four-day conflict. The Indian government has maintained that Operation Sindoor targeted only terror camps, intentionally avoiding military installations.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
BJP ‘first party' to push for caste census: Union Minister
Bengaluru:Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change Bhupender Yadav claimed on Saturday that the BJP was the 'first party' since Independence to push for a caste census. He said that under the 'Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas' (Together with all, development for all) policy, the BJP aims to bring change to all sections of society based on scientific data. He said that over the past 11 years, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's leadership, numerous developmental and welfare schemes had been implemented for the benefit of the poor and marginalised. He noted that it was PM Modi who gave constitutional status to the OBC Commission. Yadav emphasised that the Registrar General of India was empowered to conduct caste censuses and said that for the first time since Independence, such an exercise was being carried out to responsibly collect data on social, economic, caste-based, and educational indicators. He recalled that after the end of the Emergency, a non-Congress government, the Janata Party, came to power at the Centre and constituted the Mandal Commission. Yadav asserted that the BJP was the first party since Independence to push for a caste census. He mentioned that the Congress mouthpiece 'National Herald' had even published an article advocating for one-party rule in India. Following this, BK Nehru had written a letter, and a committee was reportedly formed within the Congress on this matter. Yadav alleged that Congress had long been engaged in a systematic effort to equate the party with the family, and the family with the nation. This ideology, he said, led to the declaration of Emergency. He concluded by saying that the Emergency was remembered as a dark chapter in Indian democracy, one that ignited a people's struggle driven by national self-respect and democratic values.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Nirmala Sitharaman: ‘Economic buoyancy can't be overstated; else, we wouldn't have been where we are'
From welcoming the idea of the India-US trade deal to a raft of 'second-generation reforms' to be unleashed soon, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in a free-wheeling interview with The Financial Express . Excerpts: How difficult is it for a sovereign country like India to put up with President Donald Trump's unilateral statement that the US will 'open up' our economy, when the trade talks are just underway? In fact, I would like to see it also from the Indian side. The US is one of our leading trade partners, topmost, if anything. At the junction we are in, and given our growth goals and ambition to reach Viksit Bharat by 2047, the sooner we have such agreements with strong economies, the better they will serve us. So, I'd rather put my own statement on (Trump's): 'Yes, I'd love to have an agreement, a big, good, beautiful one; why not?' But, what are the red lines India has drawn? The negotiating team ensured that industry's concerns were all taken on board before they sat at the table for talks. Agriculture and dairy have been among the very big red lines, where a high degree of caution has been exercised. There are some areas where one can always look at, seek greater market access for us, and also open up. Even in agriculture, there're areas with little or no domestic vulnerabilities… Possibly. But that (opening them up) is only with the consent of the department agriculture. There's no way we could do anything that which would weaken our agriculture, our farmers' positions. You had reiterated recently that, 'tariff king' tag doesn't befit us. Our applied tariffs are mostly low… We have only eight duties, inclusive of zero tariff. There have been drastic cuts of tariffs in the July (main) and February (interim) budgets. The effective tariff rates are (lower than the limits) announced in the gazette with Parliament approval, which is itself far below the WTO boundary. So, for India to be called a tariff king and so on is absolutely unjustified. Yet, there's scope for further lowering of tariffs, without causing any harm to domestic industry… Those are the points on which the negotiators will have to work with the country concerned. So, (our) tariff being a consideration is being addressed. Sector-specific considerations on agriculture, dairy etc. are being addressed too. Other concerns of the industry — automobile units, etc. — are also being addressed with deep consultations. I will credit the Commerce Minister (Piyush Goyal) for having had consultation prior to, during, and after the completion of the negotiations. The US tariffs are already very low. Do you see any further reduction for us? For reducing duties, the US President has to go to the Congress, a time-consuming process. So they may pitch in for it (duty cut), but it has to be done after the agreement. Could it be part of the broader deal, if not the interim one? Yes, it can be. Could India offer any major relaxations to the US on the non-tariff front — IPR, data localisation, government procurement and such? Our approach has always been that the trade negotiations should not get initiated by non- tariff concerns. Issues such as environment, gender, sustainability, carbon tax, government procurement, industrial relations, haven't been strictly part of trade negotiations. But it's now become a part and parcel of the whole thing, and we therefore take well-considered discrete positions. We just can't walk into it, because India is an emerging market, with our own market requirements. On government procurement, a lot of carve-outs have to made, to ensure purchases from MSMEs, start-ups etc. Our domestic procurement itself is very considerate towards those sections that need hand-holding. We can't open it up for someone without these concerns addressed. Manufacturing has ceded some share in GDP It's clear from the policy we announced that labor-intensive units will be given support. We have been specific that handicrafts, handmade goods etc. will get succour. So there is no way in which we are choosing between one (labour) and the other (capital/tech). Manufacturing, whether it is employment-intensive, or requires automation, policy support will be given. But these lines are becoming thin. Textiles & apparels, for instance, has conventionally been a labour- intensive sector, but it is being rapidly automated. A large knitwear unit in Tirupur, which used to employ, say, over 30,000 people, has now brought in AI to aid the production process, leading to increased productivity. A third of its workforce may now not be required to do what they were doing earlier. You cannot grudge that. But such units aren't retrenching people; rather they try to upskill them for gainful employment. A complete recast is happening even in labor-intensive industries, to the extent that traditional labels don't hold. Of course, despite this, there are some sectors where automation doesn't come in so quickly; even among a section of manufacturing units and MSMEs, automation may not be an alternative they would want at this juncture. We have to have a policy for them, to facilitate credit access to them. So the long and short of it is there is no longer the old watertight areas, the old silos are now opening up horizontally. Everybody has to be updating on their skills, and everywhere. There is fluidity in the labour market; some are becoming movable, fungible, and others, going upwards. The RBI monetary policy has gone in for not just a sharp cut in policy repo rate, but a CRR cut also. This has taken many sections by surprise, because the liquidity was already there. Some would say this showed that the RBI had a sense of foreboding, and was in a desperate move to stave off a slowdown. Now, the RBI's front-loading in the interest of growth cannot be imputed for a knee-jerk reaction. Nor is it correct to say that the RBI is doing this, as it probably sees something which we are not. Institutions such as the RBI, which have a record of good documentation don't do things that way. RBI doesn't simply undertake interest rate reduction or increase, but explains its moves in the minutes of (monetary policy meeting) in detail, and these are put out in their entirety. Investment-driven growth is inordinately delayed. Gross fixed capital formation fell to a 3-year low of 30 per cent of the GDP in FY25, whereas the aspired rate is 35 per cent-plus. How feasible is a broad-based investment cycle, which includes the MSMEs and other segments, rather than just the big corporates? There is a buoyancy in the economy, which cannot be overstated. Had it been absent, you wouldn't have remained where you are (in terms of growth), with institutions periodically updating their forecasts (S&P has recently revised India's FY26 growth estimate upward to 6.5per cent). Or you would not have generated (consistently high) GST revenues. In fact, today, people are using the GST to indicate how strongly the economy is moving forward. (GST receipts at over 7 per cent of GDP seem to have crossed VAT/excise-era levels). In GST, the data is very clearly, openly laid. You see the states and sectors where it is getting collected from. So the economy in its multifarious indicators is showing vibrancy. Of course, we would like to have higher growth, even 10 per cent, and we are only at 6.4 per cent (gross value added in FY25). But it's still 6.4 per cent and not 2-2.5 per cent, which is where Europe, and even some of the Southeast Asian countries are. So I'm not gloating at this number, but to repeatedly lamenting it is (uncharitable) given the global scenario. If Indians are working and moving the needle despite heavy odds, we should recognise it. Countries which are known for exports are no longer able to grow with such strategy. At this time, Indian exports are doing well.—FE
