Financial mess handiwork of previous govt: Seethakka
HYDERABAD: Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Minister Dansari Anasuya alias Seethakka on Tuesday lashed out at BRS working president KT Rama Rao for making unwarranted comments against Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy.
Speaking to reporters after having lunch at the residence of a fine rice scheme beneficiary at Patigadda in Hyderabad, the minister dared BRS president and former chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao to 'come to Assembly and show his power if he wants'.
While accusing the BRS of failing to fulfil the promises it made to the people during its regime, she said that the present Congress government was implementing the superfine rice scheme though it was not mentioned its poll manifesto.
'Because of the loans taken by the previous BRS government, our government is facing many financial problems. Our government is paying Rs 6,000 crore every month towards the interest and principal for loans taken by the previous government,' she added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Amit Shah 1st to be told about cash at judge Varma's residence
Union home minister Amit Shah NEW DELHI: Home minister Amit Shah was the first to be informed by Delhi Police commissioner Sanjay Arora about "four or five half-burnt sacks" of cash at Justice Yashwant Varma's official residence within hours of its chance discovery following a fire on the night of March 14 at the bungalow's storeroom. Responding to a fire emergency call, firefighters and police reached Justice Varma's Tughlaq Crescent bungalow a little after 11.30pm on March 14. The first responders, who stumbled upon the bags stuffed with cash, shot videos of half-burnt currency notes of Rs 500 denomination around midnight. They left after dousing the fire around 1am on March 15. Delhi Police chief Arora first informed the home minister on March 15 and, later, briefed Delhi HC Chief Justice D K Upadhyay about the cash. Delhi Police chief Sanjay Arora also shared "certain still photographs and video" of the storeroom fire with the Delhi HC CJ, who in turn informed then CJI Sanjiv Khanna, triggering a chain of events which led to setting up of an inquiry into the sensational episode. The inquiry panel said in its report, "The information was shared by Arora with Justice D K Upadhyay in the late afternoon of March 15, who was out of station in Lucknow on account of Holi vacation, and he was informed that a report had been sent to the Union home minister, wherein there was reference that there were four or five half-burnt sacks of Indian currency at the spot." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like เทรด Bitcoin และ Ethereum - ไม่ต้องใช้กระเป๋าเงิน! IC Markets เริ่มต้นตอนนี้ Undo The inquiry panel comprising Punjab and Haryana CJ Sheel Nagu, Himachal Pradesh CJ G S Sandhawalia and Karnataka HC's Justice Anu Sivaraman had sent 10 phones belonging to the first responders, used for taking videos and still images of burning cash in the storeroom, for authentication by Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL), Chandigarh. The laboratory authenticated the images and videos - one of 67 seconds shot by head constable Roop Chand and another of 70 seconds shot by head constable Sunil Kumar. The panel said, "The phones have been analysed by us having been sent to CFSL, Chandigarh, and are per se admissible in view of the provisions of Section 329 of BNSS." Apart from legal admissibility of the evidence against Justice Varma, the panel said these pieces of evidence also stood corroborated by witnesses. "The said videos have been shown to independent eye-witnesses, including the fire/police personnel who were at the spot (and) who have vouched for the same," the panel said.
Indian Express
34 minutes ago
- Indian Express
On Gorakhpur Link Expressway, Akhilesh says ‘It's a four-lane road, not an expressway'
Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav on Friday targeted the Yogi Adityanath-led government in Uttar Pradesh over the newly inaugurated Gorakhpur Link Expressway, claiming the government was wrongly calling a four-lane road an expressway. Addressing a press conference in Lucknow, Yadav said, 'The 91-km road was built at a cost of Rs 7,000 crore. If we take out Rs 2,000 given to farmers for compensation then Rs 5000 crore has been used to build it. This means it cost Rs 50 crore per kilometre' he said. Claiming that Lucknow-Agra Expressway had followed all the required parameters for an expressway, Yadav alleged that same were not followed in construction of the Purvanchal Expressway. Once his party comes to power, he would get the Purvanchal Expressway re-constructed with proper standards, he added. 'They raise fingers at the highway built by others. Today, the most expensive highway has been made. Today, all the newspapers mentioned that it was built at a cost of Rs 7,000 crore,' the former chief minister said. 'Our CM does not know the difference between a four-lane highway and an expressway,' the SP chief charged. SP & BSP demand action over 'graft' in transfers The Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party on Friday targeted the BJP government in Uttar Pradesh alleging corruption in transfers of employees. Addresing the media, SP president Akhilesh Yadav claimed a fight is on between ministers and officers over exchange of money. He said this in response to a question on a recent tussle between the district magistate and chief medical officer in Kanpur. There were reports of Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak complaining that transfers were ordered without his knowledge, he said. Mayawati said, 'There has been a debate over allegations of corruption in various departments. The CM should take cognisance by not only activating the Vigilance Department but also constituting a time-bound inquiry by an SIT.'
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
HC stays state relief for Group-C & D jobless school staff
Kolkata: Calcutta High Court on Friday stayed till Sept 26 the state's interim relief for Group C and Group D employees of state-run schools who lost their jobs following a Supreme Court order on April 3. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The state had announced a monthly interim relief of Rs 25,000 for Group C employees and Rs 20,000 for Group D employees. Another section of candidates, who were wait-listed, moved the HC praying for a stay on the state scheme as it "frustrated" the SC order. Justice Amrita Sinha held that people whose jobs were terminated by the SC order could not be provided such a support after the apex court had decided the issue of illegal appointments conclusively and opined that the appointments were a result of "fraud". Getting refund of the money already disbursed to the beneficiaries would be a problem if the state scheme was found to be in violation of law after the final hearing, she reasoned. The court also took note of the fact that the state welfare scheme was announced for a particular group who would not be doing any work for the state. "Paying persons gratuitously, who are not serving the state but are either sitting at home or are engaged elsewhere, does not appeal to the court," Justice Sinha held, adding that the state had applied a "pick and choose" method for determining the beneficiaries of the welfare scheme. "There are two sets of candidates. One set comprises appointed candidates whose jobs were terminated and the other set comprises the wait-listed candidates. Both sets are jobless now," Justice Sinha said, holding that the state scheme for a particular group "intended to provide succour to the tainted terminated candidates". Justice Sinha acknowledged the state's legislative competence to formulate a welfare scheme but held that such a scheme should be applied equally. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "Whether it is proper for the state to create a class of favoured candidates out of a bigger class of unemployed candidates is a matter to be decided after hearing (all) parties," she said. The court did not buy the state's argument that the petitioners should not have approached the HC when a review petition by the state was pending before the SC. It recalled that the state had proceeded to publish the scheme when its own review petition was pending before the apex court. Justice Sinha directed the petitioners to file affidavits within four weeks and the state to file an affidavit in reply within a fortnight after that before the petition would come up for hearing next.
