27 lakh power sector employees to hold nationwide strike on 9 July over UP govt's move to privatise two discoms
Shailendra Dubey, chairman of the All India Power Engineers' Federation (AIPEF), said on Wednesday that the state government has decided to privatise Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (PVVNL) and Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd (DVVNL), which cover 42 of the state's 75 districts.
"On the call of the umbrella body, National Coordination Committee of Electricity Employees and Engineers (NCCOEEE), power employees, junior engineers, and engineers across the country have staged massive demonstrations against the privatisation of the discoms," he said.
Dubey added that the umbrella body has now called for a massive protest on July 9 by 27 lakh power employees opposing the privatisation of the two UP discoms.
Demonstrations will mainly be held in Hyderabad, Thiruvananthapuram, Vijayawada, Chennai, Bengaluru, Mumbai, Nagpur, Raipur, Bhopal, Jabalpur, Vadodara, Rajkot, Guwahati, Shillong, Kolkata, Bhubaneswar, Patna, Ranchi, Srinagar, Jammu, Shimla, Dehradun, Patiala, Jaipur, Kota, Hisar, and Lucknow.
The strike on such a large scale may also affect the power supply across the country.
"We will not be responsible if power supply is affected," Dubey warned.
The power sector employees' union alleged that the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd and certain senior state government officials are colluding with selected private players. They accused them of attempting to sell discom assets worth crores of rupees to private companies at throwaway prices.
The AIPEF chairman said that if the discoms are privatised, farmers and economically weaker sections will be deprived of several benefits.
Earlier in June, the Uttar Pradesh government invoked provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1966 (U.P. ESMA), prohibiting strikes in the electricity department for a period of six months.
A notification to this effect was issued by the government.
According to the notification, the strike ban covers all services under the following entities: Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. (UPPCL); Uttar Pradesh Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. (UPRVUNL); Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. (UPPTCL); Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Ltd. (KESCO); Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (MVVNL); Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PuVVNL); Paschimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PVVNL); Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (DVVNL); UP Renewable and EV Infrastructure Ltd.
The press release noted that the decision was taken to ensure an uninterrupted power supply and prevent any disruption in essential electricity-related services across the state.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
City resident duped of Rs 6.67 lakh in online trading scam
Times News Network Chandigarh: The cyber cell of the UT Police filed a case against unknown persons for allegedly duping a city resident of Rs 6.6 lakh on the pretext of providing high returns on investment in online share trading. After taking the money, the fraudsters neither delivered profit nor returned the money. No arrest has been made in the case so far. Anil Parkash Dubey, 55, a resident of Sector 32, Chandigarh, said that he received a WhatsApp call from an unknown number on May 12. The caller claimed to represent a company involved in share market trading. After explaining the process, the caller sent a registration link on WhatsApp. Upon contacting the numbers he provided, the complainant was instructed to transfer funds. Initially, he "invested" Rs 10,000 and earned Rs 1,500 profit. Subsequently, he invested Rs 3 lakh. Later, he received a WhatsApp call requesting additional payment for IPO shares, leading to a further transfer of around Rs 3.6 lakh totalling around Rs 6.6 lakh. The accused told him to purchase shares worth Rs 44 lakh in the new IPO. They claimed that his previous IPO profits plus current holdings amounted to Rs 22 lakh and requested an additional Rs 22 lakh for share allocation. However, the victim refused to transfer more money and demanded the money he had invested with profit. However, the fraudsters kept asking for Rs 22 lakh more. At this point, Dubey realised that he had been conned and filed a complaint at the cyber police station. The complainant also provided transaction details and phone numbers of the suspects to the police. After verifying facts, police registered a case and are trailing the transactions made by the victim. MSID:: 122922527 413 |
NDTV
6 days ago
- NDTV
Can Tesla's Autopilot Tech Be Trusted? Two Cases Threaten Musk's Company
Elon Musk fought court cases on opposite coasts Monday, raising a question about the billionaire that could either speed his plan to put self-driving Teslas on US roads or throw up a major roadblock: Can this wildly successful man who tends to exaggerate really be trusted? In Miami, a Tesla driver who has admitted he was wrong to reach for a dropped cell phone, moments before a deadly accident, spoke of the danger of putting too much faith in Musk's technology — in this case his Autopilot program. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said George McGee, who ran off the road and killed a woman out stargazing with her boyfriend. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' In unusual coincidence, regulators arguing an Oakland, California, case tried to pin exaggerated talk about the same Tesla technology at the center of a request to suspend the carmaker from being able to sell vehicles in the state. Musk's tendency to talk big — whether it's his cars, his rockets or his government costing-cutting efforts — have landed him in trouble with investors, regulators and courts before, but rarely at such a delicate moment. After his social media spat with President Donald Trump, Musk can no longer count on a light regulatory touch from Washington. Meanwhile, sales of his electric cars have plunged and so a hit to his safety reputation could threaten his next big project: rolling out driverless robotaxis — hundreds of thousands of them — in several US cities by the end of next year. The Miami case holds other dangers, too. Lawyers for the family of the dead woman, Naibel Benavides Leon, recently convinced the judge overseeing the jury trial to allow them to argue for punitive damages. A car crash lawyer not involved in the case, but closely following it, said that could cost Tesla tens of millions of dollars, or possibly more. 'I've seen punitive damages go to the hundreds of millions, so that is the floor,' said Miguel Custodio of Los Angeles-based Custodio & Dubey. 'It is also a signal to other plaintiffs that they can also ask for punitive damages, and then the payments could start compounding.' That Tesla has allowed the Miami case to proceed to trial is surprising. It has settled at least four deadly accidents involving Autopilot, including payments just last week to a Florida family of a Tesla driver. That said, Tesla was victorious in two other jury cases, both in California, that also sought to lay blame on its technology for crashes. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Miami case argue that Tesla's driver-assistance feature, called Autopilot, should have warned the driver and braked when his Model S sedan blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles-an-hour in an April 2019 crash. Tesla said that drivers are warned not to rely on Autopilot, or its more advanced Full Self-Driving system. It says the fault entirely lies with the "distracted driver" just like so many other 'accidents since cellphones were invented.' Driver McGee settled a separate suit brought by the family of Benavides and her severely injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. McGee was clearly shaken when shown a dashcam video Monday of his car jumping a Key West, Florida, road and hitting a parked Chevrolet Tahoe which then slammed into Benavides and sent her 75 feet through the air to her death. Asked if he had seen those images before, McGee pinched his lips, shook his head, then squeaked out a response, 'No.' Tesla's attorney sought to show that McGee was fully to blame, asking if he had ever contacted Tesla for additional instructions about how Autopilot or any other safety features worked. McGee said he had not, though he was heavy user of the features. He said he had driven the same road home from work 30 or 40 times. Under questioning, he also acknowledged he alone was responsible for watching the road and hitting the brakes. Summarising the testimony, Tesla said in a statement after the court adjourned that McGee had "stated the simple truth that we all know: If he had just paid attention to the road instead of searching for his dropped cell phone and pressing the accelerator —which he was doing for over a minute before the crash — this tragic accident would never have happened.' But lawyers for the Benavides family had a chance in the courtroom at parrying that line of argument, asking McGee if he would have taken his eyes off the road and reached for his phone had he been driving any car other than a Tesla on Autopilot. McGee responded, 'I don't believe so.' The case is expected to continue for two more weeks. In the California case, the state's Department of Motor Vehicles is arguing before an administrative judge that Tesla has misled drivers by exaggerating the capabilities of its Autopilot and Full Self-Driving features. A court filing claims even those feature names are misleading because they offer just partial self-driving Musk has been warned by federal regulators to stop making public comments suggesting Full Self-Driving allows his cars to drive themselves because it could lead to overreliance on the system, resulting in possible crashes and deaths. He also has run into trouble with regulators for Autopilot. In 2023, the company had to recall 2.3 million vehicles for problems with the technology and is now under investigation for saying it fixed the issue though it's unclear it has, according to regulatory documents. The California case is expected to last another four days.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
6 days ago
- Business Standard
IRFC shares rally 5% on posting strongest-ever quarterly performance in Q1
IRFC shares rose in today's trade after the company posted its strongest-ever quarterly performance for the June quarter of FY26, backed by robust earnings growth and operational improvements. SI Reporter New Delhi IRFC share price: State-owned Indian Railway Finance Corporation (lRFC) shares were buzzing in trade on Wednesday, July 23, 2025, with the scrip rising up to 4.66 per cent to an intraday high of ₹136.90 per share. Around 1:30 PM, IRFC share price was trading 2.87 per cent higher at ₹134.55 per share. By comparison, BSE Sensex was trading 0.45 per cent higher at 82,553.46 levels. Why did IRFC share price rise in trade today? IRFC shares rose in today's trade after the company posted its strongest-ever quarterly performance for the June quarter of FY26 (Q1FY26), backed by robust earnings growth and operational improvements. IRFC, on Tuesday, reported double-digit growth in profit and a steady rise in revenue compared to the year-ago period. The company's total income rose to ₹6,918.24 crore in Q1FY26, up from ₹6,766.03 crore in Q1FY25 – marking the highest-ever quarterly revenue in its history. Profit After Tax (PAT) for the quarter grew 10.71 per cent year-on-year (Y-o-Y) to ₹1,745.69 crore, compared to ₹1,576.83 crore in the same period last year. This also represents IRFC's highest-ever quarterly PAT. Net interest margin (annualised) improved to 1.53 per cent, the best in the past three years, driven by better lending spreads and tighter cost management. IRFC's net worth now stands at ₹54,423.96 crore, a record high, with a book value of ₹41.65 per share. Additionally, the company's debt-to-equity ratio improved further to 7.44, highlighting a healthier balance sheet. It also retained the lowest overhead cost in the industry, reinforcing its reputation for operational efficiency. Notably, lRFC reported a continued streak of zero non-performing assets (NFIA), maintaining a clean loan book. Manoj Kumar Dubey, chairman and managing director of lRFC, said, "Our performance this quarter reflects the robustness of IRFC's financial strategy and its critical role in advancing the infrastructure goals of Indian Railways. As the sector undergoes unprecedented transformation, we are committed to driving financial innovation and maintaining operational excellence." "We continue to secure the very attractive cost of capital within the ecosystem of NBFC and true to our ethos we are sharing this benefit directly with our customers. The competitive edge with very low overhead cost coupled with Zero NPA and stable cash flows sets us apart in the industry, not just in pricing but in creating true partnership," Dubey added. This also marks the first full quarter since IRFC was accorded 'Navratna' status by the Government of India, which has given the company greater operational and investment autonomy. The status upgrade, along with record results, signals a strong strategic shift as IRFC expands its role beyond financing Indian Railways to a wider ecosystem of railway-linked infrastructure projects. 'In lRFC 2.0, the company is well on the growth path with proliferation of assets in the whole railway ecosystem with backward and forward linkage to railway centric projects,' IRFC said in a statement. Catch Stock Market LIVE Updates About IRFC IRFC, established in December 1986, is the dedicated funding arm of Indian Railways. Its primary objective is to mobilise funds from domestic and international markets to support the Extra Budgetary Resources required for the expansion and operation of Indian Railways. By borrowing from financial markets, IRFC acquires assets that are then leased to Indian Railways, ensuring a steady flow of resources for infrastructure development. Governed by the Ministry of Railways, IRFC is predominantly owned by the Government of India. It raises capital through a variety of sources, including term loans and bonds, enabling it to fulfil the financial needs of one of the largest railway networks in the world.
