In a first, Govt directs offices of ministers: Clear all files pending for over two months
The letters were sent in the second half of June and mention the number of pending files. Until now, the pendency of files used to be reviewed at the level of joint secretary, additional secretary and secretary, and not by the offices of ministers.
The Cabinet Secretariat is learnt to have been monitoring pendency at each level using the Government's E-Office digital workplace, which has around 7,000-8,000 e-files in circulation daily, of which about 2,000 go to the offices of ministers. A majority of these files pertain to inter-ministerial subjects, such as national policies and schemes.
It learnt that the Cabinet Secretariat has flagged files pending at ministers' offices for 61-90 days, 91-120 days and over 180 days. At one minister's office, several dozen files were found pending, it is learnt. At another minister's office, files related to the release of funds for a state were found pending for more than six months.
The move to flag pendency at this level is the latest measure taken by the NDA Government to cut bureaucratic delays.
The Government has earlier launched PRAGATI (Pro-Active Governance and Timely Implementation) to monitor implementation of infrastructure projects. It has been described as a three-tier system that includes officials at the Prime Minister's Office, Central Government Secretaries and Chief Secretaries of states.
The Prime Minister chairs a monthly meeting of PRAGATI where he interacts with Central Secretaries and Chief Secretaries through video-conferencing. This platform has helped accelerate over 340 'critical projects' since its inception in March 2015, sources said.
In October 2021, the Government launched the PM GatiShakti platform to facilitate planning and decision-making on infrastructure projects. Another platform, e-SamikSha, is also being used as a real-time monitoring system for follow-ups on announcements and decisions pertaining to Central ministries.
Harikishan Sharma, Senior Assistant Editor at The Indian Express' National Bureau, specializes in reporting on governance, policy, and data. He covers the Prime Minister's Office and pivotal central ministries, such as the Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers' Welfare, Ministry of Cooperation, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Ministry of Rural Development, and Ministry of Jal Shakti. His work primarily revolves around reporting and policy analysis. In addition to this, he authors a weekly column titled "STATE-ISTICALLY SPEAKING," which is prominently featured on The Indian Express website. In this column, he immerses readers in narratives deeply rooted in socio-economic, political, and electoral data, providing insightful perspectives on these critical aspects of governance and society. ... Read More
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
It makes the world more dangerous
In the mid-1950s, Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, initiated the country's nuclear journey. Amidst stiff opposition from its principal supporter, the United States, and with discreet help from France, Tel Aviv built its nuclear programme by the end of the 1960s. Today, Israel is widely known as a non-declared nuclear weapons state. This exclusive status is often compared to Iran's nuclear programme of today, which was targeted by US President Donald Trump on June 22 as B-2 stealth bombers of the US Air Force dropped 14,000 kg bunker-buster bombs on three of the country's nuclear sites — Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Iran's nuclear programme has been the centre of delicate political brinkmanship for years. It began under the rule of the former pro-West Shah of Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, and was pitched as civilian in nature, developed around former US President Dwight D Eisenhower's 'Atoms for Peace' initiative. Tehran ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1970, committing to not attaining nuclear weapon capabilities. All its Arab neighbours are also signatories to the NPT. Internationally, only a handful of nations, including Israel, India, and Pakistan, remain outside the agreement's ambit. In 2003, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, issued a fatwa against nuclear weapons. This, within Iranian polity, is seen as strong an indictment against nuclear weapons as possible coming straight from the ideological leadership. But today, Iran may be on the cusp of exiting the NPT. A broader nuclearisation of West Asia has been a subject of discussion for many years, and in more contemporary times, Iran has been at the centre of this. Tehran's nuclear brinkmanship could arguably be more related to protecting and sustaining the political system set up post the 1979 Islamic Revolution than the bomb itself. It used this strategy to pull in Western powers, negotiate, and mainstream the state back into the international system via the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015. However, questions over its enrichment activities under the NPT have lingered for years, raising suspicion, fear, and anxiety about Iran's intent, especially in Israel. Over the years, Israel has publicly raised fears that Iran was rushing towards a nuclear weapon as it pushed back against the JCPOA. Under Trump, Israel eventually found success, as whispers about intelligence suggesting Iran had materials to build nine warheads reached Trump's ears. Trump ignored even his own intelligence apparatus, which had aired doubts. The Israel-Iran conflict is now central to the region's security debate. While speculation continues over the kind of damage the US air strikes have really caused, and how much of a setback has been dealt to potential weaponisation, the path forward could also accelerate nuclearisation instead of deterring it. The impact of nuclear weapons dictating the strategic calculus in West Asia will not be geographically limited — it will be global. Arguments around the validity of nuclear weapons and their relationship to the protection of sovereignty and power cannot be dismissed. Especially at a time when international norms put in place predominantly by the West after World War II face a potential collapse. The latter is giving rise to a strategic calculus of 'might is right' for the future. And there is no better deterrence than a nuclear weapon. Recently, North Korea has proved this. Whether Iran remains adamant on gaining nuclear deterrence is an open-ended question after the recent strikes. Israel will do its best to preserve its newfound status as the region's primary military power. Irrespective of who holds power in Tehran — moderates, conservatives or ultra-conservatives — the probability of a unanimous view that nuclear weaponisation is the only way to prevent a repeat of June 2025 may solidify. And if this happens, a domino effect could play out where nuclear shields — one Arab, one Iranian, and a publicly acknowledged Israeli one — cannot be discounted. Former prime minister of Pakistan Zulfikar Ali Bhutto perhaps best described a cornered state's vision of what nuclear capabilities can provide and how it can be marketed to a population. In 1977, according to various accounts, Bhutto said, 'A Jewish bomb, a Christian bomb, now a Hindu bomb. Why not an Islamic bomb?' Pakistan is the only nuclear Islamic country, and its know-how in this regard is widely accepted to be transferable to its Arab partners such as Saudi Arabia if need be. In the end, attaining nuclear weapons in today's day and age is not a technical challenge but a political decision that has long-lasting ramifications. West Asia should make such a decision cautiously and wisely. The writer is deputy director and fellow, Strategic Studies Programme, Observer Research Foundation
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
University of California bans student boycotts of Israel-linked firms amid probe
The president of the University of California this week reiterated that student governments are prohibited from financial boycotts of companies associated with any particular country, including Israel, as the Trump administration continues its probe of alleged antisemitism on college Drake did not mention Israel by name, but he did single out student governments in a letter he sent to chancellors of the university system. He said that while freedom of speech and inquiry are core commitments of the university, its policies also require that financial decisions be grounded in sound business practices, such as competitive principle also applies to student governments,' he wrote. 'Actions by University entities to implement boycotts of companies based on their association with a particular country would not align with these sound business practices.' UC spokesperson Rachel Zaentz said in a statement that the letter is in keeping with the university's opposition to financial boycotts of companies associated with a particular country.'While our community members have the right to express their viewpoints, financial boycotts are inconsistent with UC's commitment to sound business practices, academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas,' she said. College campuses exploded with pro-Palestinian protests in the wake of the war in Gaza, including a particularly brutal clash involving police at the University of California, Los Angeles last year. At the start of his term this year, President Donald Trump launched antisemitism probes at several universities, including the University of California, US Department of Health and Human Services and National Science Foundation are requiring research grantees to certify they will not engage in boycotts of Israel or promote diversity, inclusion and equity or risk federal California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said Drake's letter is yet another example of the university system's attempts to silence student and faculty support of Palestinian human rights.'It sends a chilling message that financial interests and political pressure outweigh free expression and moral responsibility to take a stand against a foreign nation committing a genocide,' said Oussama Mokeddem, the group's government affairs UC Student Association, which represents students across the campuses, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But its president, Aditi Hariharan, told the Los Angeles Times that she disagreed with the ban.'Students already have little influence on how the university works, and student government is one of the few places where they can really get involved and have their voices heard,' she said in an interview before the letter was released.- EndsTrending Reel
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Mahmoud Khalil, freed from US jail, seizes public platform after release
US President Donald Trump's fight with elite American universities was only a few days old when federal immigration agents arrested the Palestinian student activist Mahmoud Khalil at his Columbia University apartment building in New York in the more than three months he was held at a jail for immigrants in rural Louisiana, the Trump administration escalated its battle. It arrested other foreign pro-Palestinian students and revoked billions of dollars in research grants to Columbia, Harvard and other private schools whose campuses were roiled by the pro-Palestinian student protest movement, in which Khalil was a prominent absolutely don't regret standing up against a genocide," Khalil, 30, said in an interview at his Manhattan apartment, less than two weeks after US District Judge Michael Farbiarz ordered him released on bail while he challenges the effort to revoke his US lawful permanent residency green card and deport him. "I don't regret standing up for what's right, which is opposing war, which is calling for the end of violence." He believes the government is trying to silence him, but has instead given him a bigger platform. Returning to New York after his release, Khalil was welcomed at the airport by US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a political foe of Trump; supporters waved Palestinian flags as he reunited with his wife and infant son, whose birth he missed in days later, he was the star of a rally on the steps of a cathedral near Columbia's Manhattan campus, castigating the university's leaders. Last week, he appeared before cheering crowds alongside Zohran Mamdani, the pro-Palestinian state lawmaker who won June's Democratic primary ahead of New York City's 2025 mayoral election."I did not choose to be in this position: ICE did," Khalil said, referring to the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who arrested him. "And this of course had a great impact on my life. I'm still, honestly, trying to contemplate my new reality."He missed his May graduation ceremony and emerged from jail unemployed. An international charity withdrew its offer of a job as a policy adviser, he said. The government could win its appeal and jail him again, so Khalil said his priority is spending as much time as possible with his son and wife, a was born in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria; his wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, is a US citizen and he became a US lawful permanent resident last year. Moving to New York in 2022 as a graduate student, he became one of the main student negotiators between Columbia's administration and the protesters, who set up tent encampments on a campus lawn as they demanded that Columbia end investments of its $14 billion endowment in weapons makers and other companies supporting Israel's is not charged with any crime, but the US government has invoked an obscure immigration statute to argue that Khalil and several other international pro-Palestinian students must be deported because their "otherwise lawful" speech could harm US foreign policy interests. The federal judge overseeing the case has ruled that the Trump administration's main rationale for deporting Khalil is likely an unconstitutional violation of free-speech rights. The government is is not about 'free speech,'" Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, wrote in response to queries, "this is about individuals who don't have a right to be in the United States siding with Hamas terrorists and organising group protests that made college campuses unsafe and harassed Jewish students."URGES UNIVERSITIES TO HEED THEIR STUDENTSKhalil, in the interview, condemned antisemitism and called Jewish students an "integral part" of the protest movement. He said the government was using antisemitism as a pretext to reshape American higher education, which Trump, a Republican, has said is captured by anti-American, Marxist and "radical left" Trump administration has told Columbia and other universities that federal grant money, mostly for biomedical research, will not be restored unless the government has greater oversight of who they admit and hire and what they teach, calling for greater "intellectual diversity."Unlike Harvard, Columbia has not challenged the legality of the government's sudden grant revocations, and agreed to at least some of the Trump administration's demands to tighten rules around protests as a precondition of negotiations over resuming called Columbia's response heartbreaking. "Columbia basically gave the institution to the Trump administration, let the administration intervene in every single detail on how higher education institutions should be run," he said. Columbia's administration has said preserving the university's academic autonomy is a "red line" as negotiations Lam Abrams, a Columbia spokesperson, said university leaders "strongly dispute" Khalil's characterisation."Columbia University recognises the right for students, including Mr. Khalil, to speak out on issues that they deeply believe in," she said in a statement. "But it is also critical for the University to uphold its rules and policies to ensure that every member of our community can participate in a campus community free from discrimination and harassment.'Khalil urged Columbia and other universities targeted by Trump to heed their students."The students presented a clear plan on how this campus can follow human rights, can follow international law, can be inclusive to all students, where everyone feels equal regardless of where they stand on issues," he said. "They prefer to capitulate to political pressure rather than listening to the students."- Ends
