L-G Gupta vows to regulate airfare, accelerate tourism in Ladakh
'The administration will take concrete steps to regulate airfare so that airlines do not burden passengers with exorbitant charges, particularly during the harsh winter months," the L-G said.
Interacting with Ladakh MP Mohmad Haneefa Jan and representatives of the All Ladakh Tour Operators Association (ALTOA) here, Gupta reiterated the administration's firm resolve to promote tourism in Ladakh.
'No stone will be left unturned in boosting tourism and strengthening connectivity," he said.
Underlining the urgent need to expand tourism opportunities in Kargil, Gupta stressed on organising cultural events such as the Suru Festival, and facilitating the introduction of private aircraft services in the district to enhance connectivity, thereby ensuring greater convenience for tourists.
He asked the tour operators and the other stakeholders to extend full cooperation and adopt flexible approaches to collectively strengthen Ladakh's tourism ecosystem while safeguarding the interests of the local communities.
Haneefa Jan raised several pressing issues, including the operation of 19-seater aircraft in Kargil under the UDAN scheme, upgradation of the district hospital in Kargil, and provision of advanced medical services in Leh and Kargil district hospitals.
The ALTOA delegation sought the L-G's intervention in ensuring a uniform process for tour operator registration, Ladakh Resident Certificate, and provision of funds for aggressive tourism promotion, among others, an official spokesman said.
He said Gupta gave a patient hearing to the issues raised and assured that every effort would be made to address the concerns in coordination with the concerned ministries and departments. PTI TAS TAS ARI ARI
view comments
First Published:
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
42 minutes ago
- The Print
J-K Assembly's Committee on Environment demands urgent, time-bound inquiry into Kishtwar cloudburst
'The tragic incident underscores the existential threat posed by climate change to the fragile environment of the Himalyan range and its ecological balance. Most of the area happens to be the abode of shrines where thousands of devotees/yatris throng annually, as such, measures need to be taken to safeguard the human lives,' he said. Chairman, Committee on Environment, M Y Tarigami said the deadly cloudburst has once again brought into focus the vulnerability of Jammu and Kashmir's Himalayan region to extreme weather events like flash floods, landslides, and avalanches. Srinagar, Aug 16 (PTI) The Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly's Committee on Environment Saturday expressed grave concern over the Kishtwar cloudburst, and demanded an urgent and time-bound inquiry into the tragic incident. Tarigami, who represents south Kashmir's Kulgam in the Assembly, asked whether any survey and assessment of the whole area has been made by involving the department of environment and other organisations and suggestions recommended for prevention of cloud bursts and safety of people. He demanded an urgent, time-bound probe into the tragic incident, questioning why precautionary measures were allegedly not taken despite early warnings from the Meteorological Department about severe rainfall, cloudbursts and flash floods in high altitudes of the Jammu region. 'Why were these alerts ignored and preventive measures not taken? It amounts to criminal negligence,' he said, adding, the 'bureaucratic inertia and lack of concern' must be accounted for. The senior CPI(M) leader said such disasters are not merely natural, but are 'exacerbated' by the 'reckless exploitation' of resources, deforestation, unabated and unauthorised use of stone crushers and the 'commodification' of land. The working class and marginalised people of Jammu and Kashmir cannot continue to be 'sacrificial lambs' at the altar of profit-driven environmental degradation, he said. He highlighted the alarming frequency of cloudbursts and extreme weather events across the region, including Pahalgam, Bandipora, Shangus, and Ladakh, where infrastructure and livelihoods have been severely impacted. 'The hills mourn, the birds wait in despair, the winds howl warnings, and the rivers weep – nature is screaming for justice. Yet, the ruling elites remain deaf to these cries,' he lamented. PTI SSB MNK MNK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Trump runs into difficulty of Putin diplomacy
Agency: PTI Last Updated: New York, Aug 17 (AP) President Donald Trump walked into a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin pressing for a ceasefire deal and threatening 'severe consequences" and tough new sanctions if the Kremlin leader failed to agree to halt the fighting in Ukraine. Instead, Trump was the one who stood down, dropping his demand for a ceasefire in favour of pursuing a full peace accord — a position that aligns with Putin's. After calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump wrote as he flew home from Friday's meeting in Alaska that it had been 'determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up." It was a dramatic reversal that laid bare the challenges of dealing with Putin, a cunning adversary, as well as the complexities of a conflict that Trump had repeatedly boasted during his campaign that he could solve within 24 hours. Trump's position after the summit with Putin Few details have emerged about what the two leaders discussed or what constituted the progress they both touted. The White House did not respond to messages seeking comment Saturday. While European leaders were relieved that Trump did not agree to a deal that ceded territory or otherwise favoured Moscow, the summit allowed Putin to reclaim his place on the world stage and may have bought Russia more time to push forward with its offensive in Ukraine. 'We're back to where we were before without him having gone to Alaska," said Fiona Hill, who served as Trump's senior adviser on Russia at the National Security Council during his first term, including when he last met Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In an interview, Hill argued that Trump had emerged from the meeting in a weaker position on the world stage because of his reversal. Other leaders, she said, might now look at the US president and think he's 'not the big guy that he thinks he is and certainly not the dealmaking genius." 'All the way along, Trump was convinced he has incredible forces of persuasion," she said, but he came out of the meeting without a ceasefire — the 'one thing" he had been pushing for, even after he gave the Russian leader the 'red carpet treatment." Trump has 'run up against a rock in the form of Putin, who doesn't want anything from him apart from Ukraine," she said. Democrats call for consequences for Putin At home, Democrats expressed alarm at what at times seemed like a day of deference, with Trump clapping for Putin as he walked down a red carpet during an elaborate ceremony welcoming him to US soil for the first time in a decade. The two rode together in the presidential limousine and exchanged compliments. Trump seemed to revel in particular in Putin echoing his oft-repeated assertion that Russia never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in office instead of Democrat Joe Biden at the time. Before news cameras, Trump did not use the opportunity to castigate Putin for launching the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II or human rights abuses he's been accused of committing. Instead, Putin was the one who spoke first, and invited Trump to join him in Moscow next. 'President Trump appears to have been played yet again by Vladimir Putin," said Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'The President rolled out a red carpet and warmly greeted a murderous dictator on American soil and reports indicate he got nothing concrete in return." 'Enough is enough," she went on. 'If President Trump won't act, Congress must do so decisively by passing crushing sanctions when we return in the coming weeks." Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supports diplomacy but 'peacemaking must be done responsibly." 'Instead of caving to Putin, the US should join our allies in levying tough, targeted new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure," he said. Republicans and Trump allies offer little response so far In Washington, the summit was met by little response from Trump's allies. Republican lawmakers who spoke out were largely reserved and generally called for continued talks and constructive actions from the Trump administration. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, wrote on social media after the summit that 'while the press conference offered few details about their meeting" she was 'cautiously optimistic about the signals that some level of progress was made." Murkowski said it 'was also encouraging to hear both presidents reference future meetings" but that Ukraine 'must be part of any negotiated settlement and must freely agree to its terms." Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, offered that he was 'very proud" of Trump for having had the face-to-face meeting and was 'cautiously optimistic" that the war might end 'well before Christmas" if a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin transpires. 'I have all the confidence in the world that Donald Trump will make it clear to Putin this war will never start again. If it does, you're going to pay a heavy price," he said on Fox News. For some Trump allies, the very act of him meeting with Putin was success enough: conservative activist and podcaster Charlie Kirk called it 'a great thing." Some see a Putin win and a Trump loss But in Europe, the summit was seen as a major diplomatic coup for Putin, who has been eager to emerge from geopolitical isolation. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as 'calm, without ultimatums and threats." Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said the summit was 'a distinct win for Putin. He didn't yield an inch" but was also 'a distinct setback for Trump. No ceasefire in sight." 'What the world sees is a weak and wobbling America," Bildt posted on X. (AP) GRS GRS (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: August 17, 2025, 10:45 IST News agency-feeds Trump runs into difficulty of Putin diplomacy Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Setting deadlines for president, governors can cause ‘constitutional disorder': Centre tells SC
Imposing fixed timelines on governors and the president to act on bills passed by state Assemblies would amount to one organ of the government assuming powers not vested in it by the Constitution, PTI quoted the Centre as telling the Supreme Court. Such a move could lead to 'constitutional disorder', it added. The Centre's submission was in response to a notice issued by the Supreme Court on July 22 to the Centre and all state governments on a reference made by President Droupadi Murmu about the court's April 8 ruling that set deadlines for governors and the president to grant assent to bills. A constitution bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar is hearing the matter. In a written reply on August 12, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated that the judiciary does not hold answers to all problems in a democracy. 'The alleged failure, inaction or error of one organ does not and cannot authorise another organ to assume powers that the Constitution has not vested in it,' PTI quoted Mehta as stating. He added: 'If any organ is permitted to arrogate to itself the functions of another…the consequence would be a constitutional disorder not envisaged by the framers [of the Constitution].' The April 8 ruling came on a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government after Governor RN Ravi did not act on several bills for more than three years before rejecting them and sending some to the president. The court held that governors must decide on bills within a reasonable time and cannot delay indefinitely under Article 200. Similarly, the president must act within three months under Article 201, and any delay beyond that must be explained and communicated to the state government. Both provisions outline the process of assent to bills by governors and the president. The judgment had also introduced the concept of 'deemed assent' in cases of prolonged inaction, allowing pending bills to be considered approved. In May, Murmu made the reference to the court under Article 143(1) of the Constitution with regard to its April 8 ruling. Article 143(1) allows the president to ask for the opinion and the advice of the court on matters of legal and public importance. In his note, Mehta argued that the positions of governor and president are 'politically plenary' and represent 'high ideals of democratic governance'. Any perceived lapses must be addressed through political and constitutional mechanisms, and not necessarily through judicial interventions, he added. Challenging the April 8 ruling, Mehta said that Articles 200 and 201 deliberately contain no timelines. 'When the Constitution seeks to impose time limits for taking certain decisions, it specifically mentions such time limits,' PTI quoted Mehta as stating. 'Where it has consciously kept the exercise of powers flexible, it does not impose any fixed time limit.' 'To judicially read in such a limitation would be to amend the Constitution,' Mehta added.
