K Ramakrishna Rao appointed new CS
The new head of the state administration will take charge on April 30 soon after the incumbent Chief Secretary Santhi Kumari retires from the services. Ramakrishna Rao, an IAS officer of 1991 batch, has been heading the Finance Department for the last 10 years and playing a key role in the management of finances during the crisis time, mainly when the Covid pandemic crippled the Telangana economy in 2021 and 2022 in the last BRS government.
Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy's government also relied on Ramakrishna Rao and utilised the designated new Chief Secretary's expertise in the financial management since December 2023 after the Congress assumed power in the state. He has the credit of introducing a slew of financial systems to enhance financial control and transparency in the allocation of funds.
Official sources said Ramakrishna will hold a full additional charge (FAC) of the Finance Department until the government appoints a new secretary to the key wing.
The senior IAS official also held the charge of the State Reorganization Department dealing with all matters related to the formation of the new state of Telangana and the bifurcation of assets issue between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana states.
Ramakrishna Rao had also worked as Director General of Centre for Good Governance (CGG) and brought many reforms by leveraging Information technology in the administration.
Graduated from IIT Kanpur and also Master's degree in Business Management, the IAS officer started his career as Collector of Adilabad district.
Meanwhile, it is said that current Chief Secretary Santhi Kumari has been offered Government Advisor and Chief Information Commission posts after demitting the office on her superannuation. However, she is yet to make a decision on the offer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Jindal steel donates ₹2 crore to armed forces welfare fund
In the wake of Operation Sindoor, employees of Jindal Steel have contributed a day's salary, raising ₹2 crore for the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund to support soldiers and their families affected in the line of duty. Kurukshetra MP and Jindal Group chairman Naveen Jindal handed over the cheque to defence minister Rajnath Singh in Delhi on Thursday. Kurukshetra MP and Jindal Group chairman Naveen Jindal handed over the cheque to defence minister Rajnath Singh in Delhi on Thursday. 'Our soldiers are the true sentinels of the nation. Their courage, sacrifice, and steadfast commitment inspires us all. This contribution from the Jindal Steel family is a humble gesture to honour their service and stand firmly with them and their loved ones,' Jindal said. The company said the initiative continues Jindal Steel's tradition of supporting the nation in times of need. In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it donated ₹25 crore to the PM-CARES Fund, supplied free oxygen to hospitals in Delhi, Odisha, and Chhattisgarh, distributed meals and PPE kits, upgraded medical facilities, and supported women's self-help groups in producing over one lakh protective masks. Earlier, in 2013, following the Uttarakhand (Kedarnath) tragedy, the company swiftly provided relief and essential supplies to disaster-hit regions. 'Through this united gesture, the Jindal Steel family reaffirms its deep respect and gratitude towards India's Armed Forces, underscoring a shared commitment to support those who safeguard the nation's sovereignty and security,' the company said.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Abhishek sends Anurag pen drive proof to debunk ‘bogus voter' claim
1 2 Kolkata: Trinamool national general secretary Abhishek Banerjee on Thursday sent a pen drive to former Union minister Anurag Thakur 's Delhi home, debunking his bogus voter claim in Diamond Harbour Lok Sabha constituency. Thakur, among other allegations, referred to bogus voters in booth 265. TMC provided video evidence of all 41 voters in the booth, including septuagenarian Mita Mondal, who asked why she was being called a bogus voter after voting for four decades. TMC spokesperson Kunal Ghosh said: "Thakur should have done his homework at least. His lack of knowledge on how addresses are mapped in rural Bengal, and for that matter rural India, is appalling. In rural belts, addresses of multiple homes usually have one number. In villages or rural belts, it is impossible to segregate every house based on road name or specific addresses. But this is lost on them. The booth referred to, 265, had 47 voters. Now, there are 41 voters. One person has died, three work elsewhere and three voters have got married. You have seen all voters in the video. Thakur is welcome to meet them in person." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Indonesia: New Container Houses (Prices May Surprise You) Container House | Search ads Search Now Undo You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata | Gold Rates Today in Kolkata | Silver Rates Today in Kolkata Ghosh said Thakur also "tried to harp on the increase of voters in Diamond Harbour". "There is no law in India which says people eligible cannot be registered as voters. In the last four years, the increase in Diamond Harbour assembly is 4.7%, that in Falta is 4%. So where is the anomaly? And even if there were any, why had they not protested or objected to it? The elections were held in 2024. Has there been a single demand for a repoll in these segments? Why are they suddenly making these wild allegations?" Ghosh added: "The hard facts remain, Abhishek Banerjee won in Diamond Harbour Lok Sabha with a record 7.5 lakh votes because of the work he did. During Covid, when everyone locked themselves up, Banerjee and his team were out providing medical help and running community kitchens. Later, he took medical help to the doorstep of people in Diamond Harbour." However, BJP spokesperson and MLA Agnimitra Paul stuck to the charges. "There is no reason why Kunal Ghosh is so excited over Anurag Thakur's statement. Thakur has rightly said that there has been a huge increase in the number of voters in 301 booths. We will urge EC to start the SIR from Diamond Harbour. TMC got more than 90% votes in each booth in Diamond Harbour. This is not possible in a democratic set-up," she said. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Happy Independence Day wishes , messages , and quotes !
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
The Sisyphean quest to bolster manufacturing in India
78 Years of Freedom The Narendra Modi government's quest to bolster the domestic manufacturing sector is not the first time a government has tried this. In fact, the manufacturing sector has been the focus of government policy — in one way or the other — ever since 1956, to relatively modest success. At the time of Independence or thereabouts, the Indian economy looked very different from its current state both in terms of size as well as composition. At the time, agriculture was the overwhelmingly dominant driver of the economy, contributing about half of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), as per data with the Reserve Bank of India. The nascent manufacturing sector, on the other hand, made up about 11% of the GDP. Now, the services sector has taken over the dominant role vacated by agriculture, while manufacturing has remained largely where it was. The first Five Year Plan (1951-56) focused on the idea of increasing domestic savings, since it was presumed that higher savings would directly translate into higher investments. This policy, however, ran into a fundamental problem: investments could not materially increase as the country did not have a domestic capital goods producing sector. The second Five Year Plan (1956-61), based on the ideas of PC Mahalanobis, and successive Plans sought to address this by increasing investments in the capital goods producing sectors themselves. The idea was to increase government investment in capital goods production, while the micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) would cater to the consumer goods market. As the economist and professor Aditya Bhattacharjea noted in a paper published in Springer Nature: 'With long-run growth being seen as the means for reducing widespread poverty, the model provided an intellectual justification for increasing investments in the capital goods sector of a labour-abundant country.' So, what followed was that growth rates of both investment in and output of the machinery, metals, and chemicals industries outpaced those of consumer goods industries. The Mahalanobis model did not incorporate specific industry-wise policies, but it had a few broad themes that came to characterise India's industrial policy over the country's first three decades since Independence. The first and most obvious theme was the huge role of the public sector. The feeling at the time was — not unlike what the Modi government felt in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic — that private sector investment would not be picking up the load for some time, and so the public sector would have to do the heavy lifting. The 1948 Industrial Policy Resolution (IPR) reserved the production of arms and ammunition for the Union government, and new investments in sectors as diverse as iron and steel, aircraft, ships, telephone, telegraph and wireless equipment were kept as the exclusive domain of central public sector enterprises. The 1956 IPR, which came after the historic Avadi session of the Indian National Congress in 1955, expanded the reserved list to 14 sectors. The driving ideology was that the government and the public sector would assume the 'commanding heights' of the economy. The second and equally significant theme of this thought process was the use of licensing as a means to ensure that scarce resources were allocated to priority sectors. Third, the belief was that the domestic industry would need to be protected from international competition, and this protection took the form of high tariffs — something U.S. President Donald Trump seems to have a problem with even today — and import licensing. By 1980, the share of manufacturing in India's GDP had grown to about 16-17%. According to some economists like Pulapre Balakrishnan, the real growth in the manufacturing sector took off from here, and not from the 1991 liberalisation, as is often assumed. This, they said, was due to a few policy changes enacted by the government of the time: allowing up to 25% automatic expansion of licensed capacities, allowing manufacturing licences to be used to produce other items within the same broad industrial category, and significant relaxation of price controls on cement and steel. The 1991 reforms and the resultant end of the 'licence raj', the opening up of the economy to the private sector and international competition further helped things, with the manufacturing sector growing strongly and contributing a steady 15-18% of a rapidly-growing GDP till about 2015. Steep fall That year saw a marked change, however, with the share of manufacturing in GDP consistently falling for the next decade. A major reason for this change was the non-performing assets (NPA) crisis in the banking sector. Profligate lending by banks in the 2009-14 period led to a build-up of bad loans, which came to light in 2015-18 following an Asset Quality Review of the banking sector. Such was the crisis and its fallout that bank lending to large industry virtually dried up. This, coupled with the loan-fuelled over-capacity that had been created during the 2009-14 period meant that companies did not need to invest in additional capacity to meet demand, and could not find adequate credit even if they wanted to invest. Underpinning all of this was the increased reliance on imports from China, which virtually converted large parts of Indian manufacturing into assembly and repackaging units. Of course, the COVID-19 pandemic also severely hampered both demand and investments in India. The Modi government's Make in India efforts, thus, could not prevent the share of manufacturing in GDP falling from 15.6% in 2015-16 to 12.6% in 2024-25 — the lowest share in 71 years. Another problem faced by the Modi government, something all previous governments also faced, was that a lot of the reforms to drive manufacturing were needed at the State level. So, while the Union government has put in place the framework for land and labour reforms that could potentially increase the scale of Indian manufacturing, they are held up as most State governments are not cooperating. The services sector, on the other hand, has gone from strength to strength on the back of the IT boom. So, where services made up 37% of the GDP in 1950, this grew to 42% by 1996-97. Thereafter, the acceleration was rapid, with the sector now making up nearly 58% of the GDP. So, 78 years after Independence, the manufacturing sector remains an also-ran in India's growth story, despite fervent attempts by government after government. The services sector, on the other hand, has blossomed outside the government's focus.
