Arja Srikanth appointed as Spl Commissioner, AP Bhavan, New Delhi
Vijayawada: The State government on Thursday appointed Dr Arja Srikanth, a retired IRTS officer of 1986 batch as the Special Commissioner, AP Bhavan, New Delhi, for a period of two years. He earlier worked in AP on deputation and held different positions.
Arja Srikanth is the native of Pedakallepalli village of Krishna district and was elected for IRTS. He earlier worked as the Director of Andhra Pradesh cultural department, Managing Director of AP Skill Development Corporation. He worked as AP Nodal officer in the state during Covid first and second waves.
The government has announced the duties and responsibilities of Srikanth as the Special Commissioner, AP Bhavan. He has to work in co-ordination with MPs and the Central ministers for following up on the proposals and issues from the AP government. Engage with key stakeholders and investors at the national level, coordinate with the foreign embassies and Ministry of external affairs for approaching the international entities for promotion of the State.
He has to ensure smooth fund flow under Government of India schemes and to monitor and coordinate to ensure the timely release and effective utilisation of funds sanctioned under various Government of India schemes for the AP State.
The Special Commissioner has to pursue and expedite action on matters arising from the CM's visit to Delhi ensuring resolution and progress. Assist the Resident Commissioner in managing the affairs of Andhra Pradesh Bhavan, ensuring smooth operations and coordination with various Departments and undertake any other tasks and responsibilities as may be assigned by the CM from time to time. Srikanth will draw a fixed Remuneration of Rs 2 lakh pm and will get provision of government/hired vehicle.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
29 minutes ago
- Hans India
HC grants relief to candidates
New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium 'appeared to be excessive and disproportionate' but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be 'fanciful or imaginative', it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to 'avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations'. 'It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'. The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.
Indian Express
42 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Siddaramaiah sacks political secretary over Bengaluru stampede: Who is K Govindaraju?
With the Congress government in Karnataka facing the heat following the stampede in Bengaluru on Wednesday, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah sacked his political secretary K Govindaraju on Friday. The close aide of the CM became the first Cabinet-rank official to be sacked in the aftermath of the stampede that occurred outside the Chinnaswamy stadium during the IPL victory celebrations of the Royal Challengers Bangalore, leaving 11 people dead. Govindaraju, currently an MLC, conceived the idea of a victory parade and celebration at the Vidhana Soudha, the state legislature, despite the Bengaluru City Police denying permission for the event, according to multiple sources in the government and the police. 'He reportedly liaised between the state government, KSCA (Karnataka State Cricket Association) and RCB even though the police denied permission,' a source said, adding that the police, at a certain point, were kept in the dark about the communications happening between the KSCA and the state government. Sources in the Congress alleged that Govindaraju pushed the idea of a large-scale celebration as he aspired to contest the KSCA polls. Labelled the de facto 'sports minister' by a section of state Congress leaders, Govindaraju is viewed as a 'troubleshooter who operates behind the scenes'. In the last two decades, he has always occupied important positions whenever the Congress is at the helm of affairs. He has been president of the International Basketball Federation (FIBA) Asia, the Basketball Federation of India, and the Karnataka Olympic Association. Govindaraju has denied all the allegations and told the media on Friday that he was not involved with the RCB and 'never contacted by the KSCA'. Claiming that he was disturbed by the sequence of events, he told The Indian Express, 'It has happened over a minor issue and nothing big. I will speak to you next week.' Hailing from a family of bureaucrats from Kolar, sources said Govindaraju had access to the corridors of power as his elder brother is an IAS officer promoted from the state services. A senior Congress leader credited Govindaraju's 'entreprising behaviour and never-say-no attitude' for his rise in the echelons of power. 'He first came into contact with state Minister K J George and then with (former CM) S M Krishna. He is seen as a man who caters to the needs of powerful politicians,' a leader said. Govindaraju also had a stint in electoral politics when he made his Assembly poll debut from the Shivajinagar seat in 1999. But he lost the election. He continued to remain a part of the state power circles and was elected MLC in 2012. He also served as Siddaramaiah's parliamentary secretary between 2015 and 2018. Seen in Congress circles as the party's 'fundraiser', Govindaraju found himself in the centre of a controversy in 2017 after Income Tax officials recovered a diary from him with details of payments worth Rs 600 crore allegedly made to senior Congress leaders.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Court rules Trump can exclude journalists from Oval Office, Air Force One
In a 2-1 ruling, the DC Circuit Court paused a judge's order that let AP rejoin the rotating press pool covering Trump's daily movements, siding with the administration's access limits Bloomberg A federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump can exclude journalists from the Oval Office, Air Force One and other 'restricted' spaces based on their editorial decisions, handing the administration a win in its fight with the Associated Press over access. In a 2-1 order on Friday, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit halted a lower-court judge's order that had restored the wire service's ability to participate in a rotating pool of reporters who cover the president's daily movements. The news agency sued the Trump administration in February when the White House press office started limiting the access of AP reporters and photographers after the wire service refused to update its style guide to rename the 'Gulf of Mexico' the 'Gulf of America' following a Trump executive order. A Washington federal judge's order forcing the White House to reinstate the AP's access took effect April 14 after the appeals court didn't immediately intervene. The AP next could ask the full bench of active judges of the DC Circuit to reconsider the panel's order or ask the US Supreme Court to immediately intervene. 'We are disappointed in the court's decision and are reviewing our options,' AP spokesperson Patrick Maks said. Trump called the ruling a 'Big WIN over AP today' on his Truth Social platform. 'They refused to state the facts or the Truth on the GULF OF AMERICA. FAKE NEWS!!! Judge Neomi Rao wrote in the majority opinion that the lower court's decision 'impinges on the president's independence and control over his private workspaces.' The panel did leave in place part of the original order that required the AP to still have access to the East Room in the White House, which was usually open to a broader group of reporters. 'Throughout our nation's history, presidents have held crucial meetings and made historic decisions in the Oval Office and on Air Force One,' wrote Rao, joined by Judge Greg Katsas. 'On occasion, they have welcomed the press to observe. But these restricted presidential spaces are not First Amendment fora, and the President retains discretion over who has access.' Rao and Katsas were nominated by Trump in his first term. Judge Nina Pillard, appointed under former president Barack Obama, dissented. Historically, the AP has been part of a small, rotating pool of media outlets that cover the president's day-to-day activities as well as events open to larger groups of credentialed media outlets. In an April 8 order, US District Judge Trevor McFadden ruled that the AP was likely to succeed in arguing that the Trump administration violated the First Amendment of the US Constitution by singling out one media outlet based on its editorial choices. He said that officials remained free to exclude journalists from one-on-one access to Trump, but that they couldn't kick out the AP if it allowed in its peers. The case is Associated Press v. Budowich, 25-5109, DC Circuit Court of Appeals (Washington)
