ISO 9001:2015 certification for TG Industries Commissionerate
Telangana government's Commissionerate of Industries has secured ISO 9001:2015 certification, a globally recognised standard for quality management systems.
Granted following a rigorous two-stage audit by DNV (Det Norske Veritas), the certification underscores its commitment to excellence in policy implementation, governance and service delivery, it said on Friday.
The audit involved a comprehensive evaluation of the operations, digital platforms and implementation of key industrial policies. Key focus areas included adoption of best governance practices; effective stakeholder communication; timely and efficient service delivery; transparency and accountability mechanisms; digitisation of records and process automation.
A proactive governance model and digital-first approach being followed were instrumental in meeting the stringent requirements of ISO 9001:2015 standards. The recognition reaffirms Industries department's commitment to transparency, responsiveness and continuous improvement. It reaffirms the Commissionerate's role in delivering industrial facilitation services that foster a business-friendly ecosystem and accelerate industrial development in Telangana.
EoDB rankings
Telangana continues to rank among the top achievers in the Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) index. As the nodal agency for EoDB reforms, the Commissionerate has successfully implemented all 449 reform action points under the current assessment cycle and is confident of maintaining the State's leadership in future rankings.
Telangana's revenue-based financing programme for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) to enable the businesses to access credit based on projected future sales thereby helping reduce their financial burden and improve cash flow as well as implementation of the TG-iPASS single-window clearance system has come in for appreciation from NITI Aayog in recent months.
TG-iPASS, which is self-certification-driven mechanism, significantly minimised inspection requirements and regulatory burdens, making it easier to do business in the State. NITI Aayog recognised it as a national best practice, it said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
14 hours ago
- Indian Express
Punjab Agriculture Policy 2023: Stuck in govt red tape, policy that pushes for farm reforms, offers urgent solutions to agrarian crisis
As he presented Punjab's case in the 10th governing council of the NITI Aayog in Delhi, Chief Minister batted for crop diversification, urging the Centre to grant an incentive of Rs 17,500 per hectare for maize to replace paddy — the crop that over the years has turned into a bane for state and its aquifers. Incidentally, promotion of crop diversification is among several bold reforms recommended as urgent solutions to Punjab's deep-rooted agrarian crisis in Punjab Agriculture Policy-2023, a 200-page document that has got thumbs up from even the farmers unions — Bhartiya Kisan Union (Ugrahan), one of the largest farm bodies in state — had even staged a dharna to bring it in the public domain. Now, 20 months after it was crafted by the 11-member Agriculture Formulation Committee, led by Dr Sukhpal Singh, chairperson of the Punjab State Farmers' and Farm Workers' Commission, the policy — Punjab's first — remains on paper with hardly any meaningful steps taken toward its implementation. The policy was submitted to the government on October 13, 2023 and was put in public domain in September 2024 and was almost accepted by all the stakeholders. The policy offers a robust framework to tackle state's long-standing agricultural challenges, and proposes reforms such as a legal guarantee for Minimum Support Prices (MSP), a pension plan for small farmers and farm workers, one-time debt settlements, special debt waivers for marginal farmers, and crop insurance, among other critical measures. Despite the policy's potential to address pressing issues such as economic distress among farmers and the unsustainable farming practices currently plaguing the state, the government's continued inaction leaves many questioning the AAP dispensation's commitment to agricultural reforms. Why is its implementation delayed Senior officials in the Agricultural Department says that major obstacles in the policy's implementation is funding requirements and its 'cooperative nature' while the government's preference is for 'corporative nature'. To effectively address the agricultural crisis, significant investment is needed — something that the fund-starved and debt-burdened state lacks. The stakeholders, however, argue that delaying its implementation will only prolong the crisis, aggravating the suffering of the farmers. 'The policy lays out clear and practical solutions. What we need now is the political will to fund and implement these reforms,' said a member of the Agriculture Formulation Committee requesting anonymity. A senior official in the Agriculture Department, said that the key questions remain. 'How will these recommendations be implemented, especially when past proposals from various committees, including renowned agricultural scientist Dr MS Swaminathan's MSP recommendations and economist Sardara Singh Johl's 'Johl Plan' for diversification and crop rotation, have failed to materialise despite numerous farmer protests? While the policy outlines a roadmap, but how will the necessary funds be sourced?'. The policy records several things — from the farm suicide data (up till 2018) to farm debt, including Rs 73,673 crore in institutional debt. It, however, is silent on suicides from 2018 till 2023 and on the issue of non-institutional debt of farmers. It suggests establishing a State Agricultural Costs and Prices Commission to ensure fair prices for all non-MSP crops, dairy products, and eggs. It further suggests that legal guarantee of procurement at MSP is essential. It suggests that the MSP should be fixed according as per the Swami-nathan Report — at a minimum of C2 + 50 per cent with additional costs outlined in the Ramesh Chand Committee Report. For instance, it state that the MSP for wheat should have been Rs 2,787 per quintal rather than the Rs 1,925 per quintal set by the Government of India and should have reached around Rs 3,200 per quintal as against the current Rs 2,425 per quintal. 'Such suggestions do not suit the governments,' said an Agriculture Department official. The policy proposes a 'one-time debt settlement scheme' through cooperative banks. It also proposes a pension plan for farm workers and small farmers (with up to 5 acres of land), starting at the age of 60. A special debt waiver and debt swapping schemes for small farmers are also outlined, alongside the registration of money lenders to regulate non-institutional credit system. It suggests creating state's own crop insurance scheme and crop insurance fund and leasing one-third of Panchayati land and other common lands to farm workers under cooperative farming. It proposes a similar livestock insurance scheme through Milkfed and the Dairy Development Department. To address water scarcity, it recommends growing crops in their natural growing areas (NGA) to improve quality and reduce production costs. It proposes banning paddy cultivation in 31 dark blocks, where water extraction exceeds the recharge rate by 201 to over 301 per cent, and promoting alternative crops like cotton, maize, sugarcane, and vegetables in a phased manner. The policy also advocates for timely canal water supply in the cotton belt, discouraging paddy cultivation, incentivizing cotton in designated zones. Water-saving technologies, such as alternate wetting and drying, are recommended to improve paddy yield while using 30-40 per cent less water. Additionally, it focuses on micro-irrigation methods for several crops and advocates for the ongoing 'Pani Bachao, Paisa Kamao' (PBPK) scheme. It further advocates immediate payment to sugarcane farmers by the sugar mills, promoting ethanol production, and providing maize dryers to farmers. The policy also calls for intervention in basmati pricing through Markfed's price stabilisation fund and supports organic farming initiatives. The policy proposes establishing 13 Centres of Excellence (CoE) for different crops and and a hub for seed production with region-specific crops like potato seeds in Doaba. It further advocates for strengthening agricultural research and extension services and establishing an Agricultural Marketing Research Institute (AMRII) to balance supply and demand. The policy acknowledges the heavy burden of the free power subsidy (Rs 8,000-9,000 crore annually), noting how the increasing number of tube wells over the past 15 years has driven this cost to over Rs 80,000 crore. It suggests reducing the subsidy through water-efficient farming practices. It also recommends doubling the mandatory workdays under MGNREGA to 200 and providing Rs 10 lakh in compensation to the families of farmers, farm workers, and rural artisans who have died by suicide. Free healthcare should also be extended to these groups. The policy discusses forming Progressive Farmers' Societies (PFS) linked to crop CoEs and establishing an Agricultural Marketing Research and Intelligence Institute (AMRII) to balance demand and supply. An Innovative Agricultural Marketing Society (IAMS) would serve as the apex marketing body for these societies, ensuring advanced planning for high-quality produce, it says. For horticulture, the policy recommends improving nurseries to provide high-quality planting material and upgrading kinnow value addition infrastructure, including cold chains. Lastly, the policy proposes building Punjab into a hub for innovative farm machinery manufacturing and strengthening agricultural research and extension services by filling vacant posts and updating land tenancy laws.
The Print
14 hours ago
- The Print
India's GDP victory over Japan is still a year away. Here's why
Equally clearly, the database presents estimates of India's GDP for fiscal year 2025-26 as $4.187 trillion and Japan's as $4.186 trillion—that is, India's GDP exceeds Japan's by 0.02 per cent in 2025-26. From this, many, if not most, analysts have erroneously concluded that this won't happen until March 2026. Why erroneous? Because it is a fiscal year conclusion, and the 'centre of gravity' of an April-March fiscal year is September. So, it is likely that the NITI Aayog CEO, in making his hasty conclusion, was wrong by only four months. As it happens, Subrahmanyam was hasty by approximately a year. Critics of the government's assertion make two points, one relevant and the other 'noisy'. The relevant point is that the IMF World Economic Outlook (WEO) database clearly shows that for the fiscal year 2024-25 (ending in March 2025), India's GDP was $3.9 trillion while Japan's was $4.0 trillion—that is, Japan was 2.6 per cent ahead. Fortunately, both Japan and India have the same fiscal year—April-March—hence adjustments to WEO data are not needed. There has been much discussion about the assertions made by BVR Subrahmanyam, the CEO of NITI Aayog, India's only official think tank. Speaking at a press conference following the 10th NITI Aayog Governing Council Meeting chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and presumably attended by senior bureaucrats, Subrahmanyam said that 'as I speak', India has overtaken Japan in current dollar GDP. Note that his conclusion and inference pertains to current dollar GDP, and we have to contend with the conversion from rupees to US dollars, and from Japanese yen to US dollars. India and Japan numbers First, let us look at the Indian estimate. Data just released by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) on Friday shows that India's GDP in current prices for January-March 2025 quarter was Rs 88.17 trillion, or annualised Rs 352.7 trillion. On 23 May, the last market day before Subrahmanyam's assertion, the exchange rate was Rs 85.4/$—that is, current GDP in March 2025 was 352.7/85.4 or $4.13 trillion. Indian nominal GDP is growing by about 10 per cent a year. So, by March 2026, we should expect current India GDP to reach $4.54 trillion. Now we examine the fortunes of Japan's GDP. The seasonally adjusted quarterly estimate of Japan's GDP is 624.9 trillion yen for Q1 of 2025. On 23 May, the exchange rate was 142.6 yen/$; hence Japan's GDP in March 2025 was $4.38 trillion, some 6.1 per cent ahead of India's GDP on the same date. Given that exchange rates change every day, we need to decide as to what exchange rate we should use. Amongst many, we can use a calendar year estimate, a quarterly estimate or a 23 May estimate. But no matter which one we use, it will be wrong because exchange rates do not remain constant, and the future is not asked to see, que sera sera. All of us are concerned with the 23 May estimate, hence the discussion and this note. Japan's nominal GDP growth has averaged 3.4 per cent for the last three years. Assuming this to be the average for 2025-26, the estimate for March 2026 is $4.53 trillion GDP (as 4.38*1.034). So it will be sometime in March 2027 that India's GDP will exceed Japan's in current dollars. Again, que sera sera, the conclusion will depend on what happens to exchange rates. Changes in exchange rates affect nominal dollar GDP calculations. Assume in March 2027 all estimates come true except the $ yen exchange rate changes from 142.7 to 135 (the yen has become stronger by 5.7 per cent), then Japan's GDP will be 5.7 per cent higher and the day of decision will be delayed beyond March 2027. How do we interpret the dash to conclusion by the CEO? As a sports junkie, I recall countless occasions over the last 50 years when a sprinter looked over his shoulder to see his competitor – and lost the race. Also read: GDP data revisions—why India still struggles with sharp variations Lesson for India—good data, bad data What do we learn from his data-heavy exercise? First, haste makes wrong. Second, and more importantly, what difference will it make to the price of tomatoes (as I am often inclined to say) if India GDP is equal to Japan GDP? Third, and most important, and as pointed out by many, what matters is equivalence in per capita GDP, and on this, we are decades away—whether measured in current $ or PPP $ or constant dollars. One final comment. It is unfortunate that in the last ten years, most of the decision-making bureaucracy has lost respect for the data. The bad quality household consumer expenditure data for 2017-18 has still not been released. Several analyses of the 2017-18 data (see the 2022 IMF Working Paper authored by me and my colleagues Karan Bhasin and Arvind Virmani, and several other documents and books) conclude that the 2017-18 data was of such bad quality that the world, and India, needed to examine why it was of such bad quality. By not releasing that data, we have created an atmosphere where it is 'open sesame' for domestic and international scholars to question good Indian data. Food for thought for Niti and decision-making bureaucrats. Surjit S Bhalla is a former Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund. He tweets @surjitbhalla. Views are personal. (Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)
Indian Express
18 hours ago
- Indian Express
India may soon become the third-largest economy in the world. But there is more to it
In a bout of professional enthusiasm, the chief executive officer of NITI Aayog, the Union government's policy body for transforming India, announced that the Indian economy had overtaken Japan to become the world's fourth-largest economy, following the USA, China and Germany. He jumped the gun because, as NITI Aayog member Arvind Virmani pointed out, this is likely to happen a few months down the road. With a nominal GDP of $4.187 trillion, India is set to move ahead of Japan's GDP of $4.186 trillion by the end of 2025. However, as many have pointed out, the vast gap between Japan's per capita GDP of $33,900 and India's per capita GDP of $2,880 sets the two apart. India remains a low-middle-income economy, a developing economy with a modest per capita income but demographics that will sustain the growth process. Japan is a developed, if an ageing, industrial and trading power. The sustained growth of the Indian economy over the past three decades, with its ups and downs, has, without doubt, slowly but surely increased the size of the economy. Way back in July 1991, the then finance minister of India, Manmohan Singh, told Parliament, prefacing his forecast with Victor Hugo's famous words that 'no power on Earth can stop an idea whose time has come', that the emergence of India as a major economic power in the world happens to be one such idea. It became an idea that gained international recognition a few years later when the British historian Angus Maddison published his masterly survey of the world economy pointing to the resurgence of China and India. Maddison's classic study of The World Economy (OECD, 20023) made the point that in 1700, China and India accounted for almost half the world income and that two centuries of colonialism, combined with the fact that the Industrial Revolution had occurred mainly in Europe, contributed to the decline of these ancient and large Asian economies. The Maddison study kindled hope in Asia that China and India were on the way to recover their lost space in the global economy and that the 21st century would once again be an Asian century. Since China was by then rising at a faster pace, it overtook Japan in 2010. This event happened soon after the transatlantic financial crisis (usually referred to as the global financial crisis), of 2008-09. The crisis had helped China overtake Japan and Europe and reduce the gap with the USA. It created a global flutter and marked the turning point in China's global rise. It is instructive to recall that in 2010, China overtook Japan when Japan's GDP was still $5.474 trillion. China's emergence as the world's second-largest economy sent Japan into a funk. Japan had already lived through a decade of low growth and low expectations, and China overtaking it became a wake-up call. It would not be incorrect to speculate that the return of Shinzo Abe as prime minister of Japan in 2012 (his first term of 2006-07 was truncated by poor health) was partly on account of Japan's yearning for a strong and charismatic leader focused on economic revival. Abe began his second tenure launching the 'three arrows' programme that came to be known as 'Abenomics' — of aggressive monetary easing, liberal fiscal policy and structural reforms aimed at enhancing productivity and growth. This gave Japan hope that, despite being pushed to third place by China, it could still remain a globally important economy. The exit of Abe, followed by a string of lacklustre leadership and the challenges posed by the return of President Donald Trump, have depressed Japan once again. To add to its woes, Germany recently overtook Japan, becoming the third-largest economy, pushing Japan to fourth place. Germany, too, has been slowing down, and so Japan and Germany could see themselves swapping places from time to time, depending on their relative performance. Also, recall that China overtook a still-growing Japan, India is overtaking a slowing Japan and a slowing Germany. It is against this background that news has come from the International Monetary Fund that India is now poised to overtake Japan. It is interesting to note that while there was much hand-wringing and widespread concern in Japan when China overtook it, the news about India has not made any impact in Japan. There was, according to my friends in Japan, little news coverage and no expression of any concern. This could be on account of the fact that while China is viewed as a challenge in Japan, India is viewed as an opportunity. Good diplomatic and economic relations have, in part, contributed to a benign response in Japan to the news of India's rise. Equally, the fact that India in no way poses any challenge to Japan, either as an economic competitor or as a geopolitical rival, would also explain the subdued reporting of the IMF news. When China overtook Japan, the former was viewed as a significant competitor in the global market as well as a geopolitical rival. Export-dependent Japan viewed with concern the rise of China as a global trading power. India, on the other hand, is still not viewed as a competitor in the trading world, much less a geopolitical rival. It is still possible that exchange rate changes, new challenges in global trade and seasonal performance of the three economies — India, Japan and Germany — may keep the rank race alive for some time. After all, the gap between the three is not much. If the Indian economy forges ahead over the next few years and crosses the $5 trillion mark, it would place some distance between itself and Japan and Germany. If not, these rankings could keep changing. What is, however, certain is that once India clearly establishes itself as the third-largest economy, it will remain in that place for a long time to come, given the distance it has to travel to catch up with China, whose nominal GDP is currently around $18 trillion. With the US and China in a race for economic space and geopolitical influence, India's best bet would be to focus on its own economic performance and ensure that it is able to sustain an inclusive growth process that makes the economy more competitive and improves peoples' lives. The writer is founder-trustee, Centre for Air Power Studies and distinguished fellow, United Service Institution of India
