CM trashes allegations on Banakacherla project
Speaking to the media in Kuppam on Thursday, Naidu made it clear that the project would not harm anyone. He amplified that misinformation was being deliberately spread to mislead the public.
Recalling his efforts in the past, when he was the chief minister of the undivided Andhra Pradesh, Naidu pointed out that he was the one who brought the Devadula Lift Irrigation Project to Telangana. 'I inspected key locations like the Srisailam project, SLBC, and the Madhava Reddy Canal before initiating the project over the Godavari River,' he said. He also mentioned that the Pushkara and Tatipudi Lift Irrigation Schemes were introduced in Andhra Pradesh under his leadership to ensure better water management.
Taking a swipe at the Yellampalli project announced during YS Rajasekhara Reddy's tenure, Naidu said it never saw the light of day and was marred by a major scam. He stressed that both Telangana and Andhra Pradesh had a rightful share in the Godavari's waters and could benefit greatly if just a fraction, about 200 TMC out of the 2,000 TMC that flows into the sea every year, was used efficiently.
'Sharing water resources fairly can uplift the entire Telugu community,' he observed. Naidu reiterated that he had never opposed, nor would he oppose any irrigation initiative taken up by Telangana on the Godavari River. Speaking on social development, the Chief Minister criticised the previous government for neglecting the poor.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
12 minutes ago
- Hans India
CM for leveraging tech to make AP zero-crime state
Vijayawada: Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu directed officials to transform the state into a zero-crime-rate state by leveraging technology. He emphasised that Andhra Pradesh should become a model state in law and order monitoring through effective use of technology. The Chief Minister conducted a review with officials on real-time governance at the Secretariat. He instructed that crime hotspots be continuously monitored through CCTV cameras to control criminal activities. He also directed officials to revise regulations to allow the use of footage from private CCTV cameras, stressing that private cameras should also be leveraged for crime control. He said technology must be used more effectively in cases where individuals commit crimes under the guise of politics. He warned that those who cleverly commit crimes, shift the blame onto the government, and fail to cooperate with the police must be dealt with caution. For such individuals, he suggested invoking the Public Safety Act to collect data from them. The Chief Minister instructed officials to focus on identifying those responsible for such crimes. He also said that in the interest of public safety and crime prevention, the Public Safety Act should be extended to include the collection of CCTV footage from shopping malls, theatres and hotels during investigations. Additionally, the Chief Minister instructed an increase in the use of drones and CCTV cameras across various sectors. He enquired about the progress of the Drone City in Orvakallu. The Chief Minister advised the use of blockchain technology to secure records and data across various government departments. He instructed that revenue records also be thoroughly sanitized and secured entirely using this technology. He emphasised that information from different departments should be integrated through a data lake. He stressed that early warning systems in lightning-prone areas must function efficiently to protect valuable lives. He instructed that sirens be activated in advance in such areas. He also ordered the rapid restoration of physio-meters and sensors to monitor groundwater levels. He directed that data on current water levels in reservoirs, inflows, and the volume of water being discharged into the sea be properly recorded. He noted that flood management could be improved through real-time monitoring of reservoir inflows. The Chief Minister confirmed that all reservoirs in the state are being filled to full capacity due to the current inflows. Further, he stressed that information provided by INCOIS on sea wave activity and areas suitable for fishing must be made accessible to fishermen and residents of coastal regions.
Hans India
44 minutes ago
- Hans India
Even the first citizen is answerable under the RTI Act!
A Telugu phrase says: 'Darina poye daanayya' (anybody who walks in the street). According to Cambridge Dictionary, 'Tom, Dick, and Harry' is an idiom that refers to ordinary people, anyone, or everybody. It's often used to indicate that something is not exclusive and is available to or intended for the general public. The question is: whether a citizen can ask for information from the President of India under the Right to Information Act? Who is a citizen? Should one prove his or her citizenship and if so how? Even a passport is not proof of citizenship, according to the Union Home Minister. This writer also does not have proof of citizenship. Under the Right to Information, a PIO (Public Information Officer), who is supposed to provide information, cannot demand proof of citizenship. Can the PIO prove whether he has citizenship? If a PIO asks for citizenship proof, it means he has denied an individual of RTI. Under the RTI Act, he is liable to pay a Rs 25000 penalty. In this case the question was sent to the President; it is the story of the RTI question. How the RTI gave the 'details' of Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad, former President, is very interesting, as explained by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi. One Subhash Chandra Agrawal had on August 9, 2010, filed a petition under RTI. Shailesh explained: The institutions of democracy had not become robust enough to withstand an assault, and it is imperative for citizens to know the reasons why and how democracy in India was nearly lost. He allowed an appeal, directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) and under-secretary at the President's Secretariat to provide the complete information on the declaration of internal emergency by the then president, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. Gandhi said, 'The Commission cannot pass any direction in this regard, as it does not come within the Commission's powers as mandated under the RTI Act. Now that various functionaries like ministers, judges, and Information Commissioners have voluntarily put up details of their assets on websites, it is for the President to take a decision on this matter. The PIO's reply was therefore correct.' The PIO also stated that the issue of whether exchanges between the President of India and the Prime Minister can be revealed under the RTI Act was the subject matter of a petition before the Delhi High Court. The Supreme Court, in a nine-judge bench decision in the SR Bommai & Ors Vs Union of India & Ors (AIR 1994 SC 1918), discussed the meaning and scope of Article 74 of the Constitution of India. Specifically, as regards Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court of India observed as follows: '… Then comes Clause (2) of Article 74 which says that the question 'whether any, and if so, what advice was tendered by the Ministers to the President shall not be enquired into in any Court.' The idea behind Clause (2) is this: the Court is not to enquire—it is not concerned with—whether any advice was tendered by any Minister or Council of Ministers to the President, and if so, what was that advice. That is a matter between the President and his Council of Ministers. What advice was tendered, whether it was required to be reconsidered, what advice was tendered after reconsideration, if any, what was the opinion of the President, whether the advice was changed pursuant to further discussion, if any, and how the ultimate decision was arrived at, are all matters between the President and his Council of Ministers. They are beyond the ken of the Court. The Court is not to go into it. It is enough that there is an order/act of the President in appropriate form. It will take it as the order/act of the President. It is concerned only with the validity of the order and legality of the proceeding or action taken by the President in exercise of his functions and not with what happened in the inner Councils of the President and his Ministers. No one can challenge such decision or action on the ground that it is not in accordance with the advice tendered by the Ministers or that it is based on no advice. If, in a given case, the President acts without, or contrary to, the advice tendered to him, it may be a case warranting his impeachment, but so far as the Court is concerned, it is the act of the President…' (Emphasis added) The Supreme Court ruled that this obligation could not be evaded by seeking refuge under Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court, while interpreting the scope of Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India, clearly laid down in SR Bommai that Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India merely barred an enquiry into the question whether any, and if so, what advice was tendered by the council of ministers to the president. It did not bar the court from calling upon the council of ministers to disclose to the court the material upon which the President had formed the requisite satisfaction. The material on the basis of which advice was tendered did not become a part of the advice. Even if the material was looked into by, or shown, to the president, it did not take the character of advice. 'Given that the advice tendered by the council of ministers to the president enjoys the Constitutional protection of Article 74(2) and cannot be disclosed to the courts, a citizen under the RTI Act cannot seek information pertaining to such advice. However, the Supreme Court has held that the materials on the basis of which such advice is tendered by the council of ministers or on the basis of which the president forms the requisite satisfaction is not covered by Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India. Since Article 74(2) does not cover such material, it can be accessed under the RTI Act, subject only to the exemptions under the RTI Act.' He wrote in the Second Appeal 'complete and detailed information on all documents/ records/ deliberations/ correspondence/ file notings on declaration of internal emergency in the country by Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, the then president is not barred from disclosure under Article 74 of the Constitution of India; only the advice received by the then president from the then prime minister is protected from disclosure under Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India (in line with the ruling in SR Bommai) and therefore cannot be provided to the appellant under the RTI Act.' It was based on and the report of Moneylife on the website. 18 June 2013. Being a former President, he committed a serious blunder. How can such a Constitutional wrong be repaired by a Right to Information petition? The people of India need to answer! (The writer is Advisor, School of Law, Mahindra University, Hyderabad)
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Andhra Pradesh chief minister Chandrababu Naidu advocates enhanced use of technology for public safety
Vijayawada: Advocating extensive use of technology to achieve zero crime rate in the state, chief minister N Chandrababu Naidu on Monday suggested that officials should consider making sharing of data from surveillance cameras of private establishments mandatory under the Public Safety Act. He directed officials to amend the rules if required, noting that some people resort to crimes under the guise of politics and shift the blame on the govt. He instructed officials to be more vigilant where people and political leaders do not cooperate with the police. "Take steps for collection of data from such people under the Public Safety Act and hold them responsible for the crimes if they willingly do not extend cooperation to the police. For prevention of crime, public safety, and investigation, sharing of CCTV footage from theatres, malls, hotels, and other establishments should be made mandatory," the CM said, while asking officials to identify crime hotspots and ensure round-the-clock monitoring through CCTVs. Naidu, during a meeting with officials of Real Time Governance Society (RTGS), suggested officials to use blockchain technology for storage of govt records and integrate data from all depts with the 'data lake' which is being created. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo Emphasising on effective utilisation of technology, he asked officials to issue alert messages in lightning-prone areas to save lives. He also called for water auditing of all sources, including groundwater levels, not only for better management of water resources but also to mitigate floods with real-time monitoring of rainfall, inflows to reservoirs, and prevailing weather conditions. The chief minister further suggested integrating the data of all depts with RTGS and making corrections by corroborating with ground-level information if there are any mismatches. Reiterating the target of achieving the goal of a poverty-free state by 2029, Naidu asked officials to expedite the process of P-4 by identifying poor families and connecting them with interested affluent people.
