Kerala: Three officials suspended over lapses in road maintenance
Riyas announced the suspension of the officials through a Facebook post.
The suspended officials are the Executive Engineer of the Manjeri division, the Assistant Executive Engineer of the Perinthalmanna subdivision, and the Assistant Engineer of the Perinthalmanna section.
According to Riyas, following complaints from the public, the Chief Engineer of the Roads Wing was directed to conduct an inquiry.
The suspension was initiated on the basis of the Chief Engineer's report.
Riyas said that despite receiving multiple complaints from the public, the officials failed to take any action to carry out maintenance work.
The minister has also directed the PWD Vigilance Wing to initiate a probe against the suspended officials.
Riyas explained that the government had introduced the Running Contract Scheme to ensure timely road maintenance across Kerala.
'However, during inspections this year, gross negligence in carrying out the works was noticed in certain areas. In Malappuram, even after funds were allocated, the technical sanction and tendering process were not initiated on time. The lapse was identified in the Perinthalmanna subdivision under the Manjeri division of the PWD Roads Wing," Riyas said.
The minister reiterated that road maintenance works would continue without compromise, with public participation playing a crucial role in the process.
He added that under the Running Contract Scheme, blue boards had been installed on roads with the phone numbers of the concerned officials displayed for the public to lodge complaints.
If no action is taken after a complaint is raised, the matter can be escalated, he said. PTI TBA TGB KH
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.
Loading comments...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
41 minutes ago
- News18
US court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump
Agency: PTI Last Updated: New York, Aug 22 (AP) A New York appeals court has thrown out President Donald Trump's massive financial penalty while narrowly upholding a judge's finding that he engaged in fraud by exaggerating his wealth for decades. The Thursday's ruling spares Trump from a potential half-billion-dollar fine but bans him and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. Trump, in a social media post, claimed 'total victory" in the case, which stemmed from a civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. 'I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State," the Republican wrote. James, a Democrat, focused on the parts of the decision that went her way, saying in a statement that it 'affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud." The ruling came seven months after Trump returned to the White House, his political fortunes unimpeded by the civil fraud judgment, a criminal conviction and other legal blows. A sharply divided panel of five judges in the state's mid-level Appellate Division couldn't agree on many issues raised in Trump's appeal, but a majority said the monetary penalty was 'excessive". A lower-court judge, Arthur Engoron, had ordered Trump last year to pay $355 million in penalties after finding that he flagrantly padded financial statements provided to lenders and insurers. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. Additional penalties for executives at his company, the Trump Organisation, including sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr, have brought the total to $527 million with interest. 'While harm certainly occurred, it was not the cataclysmic harm that can justify a nearly half billion-dollar award" to the state, Judges Dianne Renwick and Peter Moulton wrote in one of three opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. They called the penalty 'an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution." Both were appointed by Democratic governors. Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and the president was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. Donald Trump Jr celebrated the decision by mocking James, who had periodically posted a running tally of the fraud penalty, with interest. Over a post from James in February 2024, when the tally was nearly $465 million, Trump Jr wrote: 'I believe you mean $0.00. Thank you for your attention to this matter." The five-judge panel, which split on the merits of the lawsuit and Engoron's fraud finding, dismissed the monetary penalty in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for an appeal to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. In the meantime, Trump and his co-defendants, the judges wrote, can seek to extend the pause to prevent any punishments from taking effect. While the Appellate Division dispatches most appeals in a few pages in a matter of weeks, the judges weighing Trump's case took nearly 11 months to rule after oral arguments last fall and issued 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Two judges wrote that they felt James' lawsuit was justifiable and that she had proven her case but the penalty was too severe. One wrote that James exceeded her legal authority in bringing the suit, saying that if any lenders felt cheated, they could have sued Trump themselves, and none did. Another wrote that Engoron erred by ruling before the trial that James had proven Trump engaged in fraud. In his portion of the ruling, Judge David Friedman, appointed by a Republican governor, was scathing in his criticism of James for bringing the lawsuit. 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not market hygiene' … but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business," Friedman wrote. 'The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business." Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. At the conclusion of the civil trial in January 2024, Trump said he was 'an innocent man" and the case was a 'fraud on me". The Republican leader has repeatedly maintained the case and the verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, both Democrats. Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney Abbe D Lowell has said investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign". Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defence also noted bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing last September, Trump's lawyers argued that many of the case's allegations were too old and that James had misused a consumer protection law to sue Trump over private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. State attorneys said that while Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, his exaggerations led lenders to make riskier loans and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net worth numbers. The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. top videos View all And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Trump also is appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims. (AP) SCY SCY (This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments First Published: August 22, 2025, 04:45 IST News agency-feeds US court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump 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. Loading comments...
News18
an hour ago
- News18
5 Dead, 36 Hurt In Colombia Bomb Attack Near Air Base, Probe Underway
Last Updated: Cali Mayor Eder has announced a ban on large trucks entering the city, citing the risk of additional attacks. A vehicle bomb explosion in the Colombian city of Cali killed at least five people and injured dozens more on Thursday, according to reports from AFP. The incident occurred near a military facility and has raised concerns about escalating violence in the lead-up to the 2026 presidential elections. Cali's Mayor Alejandro Eder confirmed the toll, stating that preliminary reports indicated at least five fatalities and 36 people injured. The explosion occurred on a busy street in the northern part of the city, close to the Marco Fidel Suárez Military Aviation School. Authorities believe the blast targeted the air base directly. Police officials stated that the vehicle bomb was likely meant to hit military personnel stationed at the base. While the motive remains unclear, some officials have suggested the attack may be an attempt to destabilize ongoing peace efforts in the region. Eyewitnesses described the moment of the explosion. Héctor Fabio Bolaños, 65, told AFP, 'There was a thunderous sound of something exploding near the air base. Many houses were damaged in front of the base." Following the blast, several buildings, including a school, were evacuated as a precaution. Another witness indicated that some of those killed may have been civilians passing by at the time of the explosion. In response to the attack, Mayor Eder has announced a ban on large trucks entering the city, citing the risk of additional threats. He also offered a reward of US$10,000 for information leading to those responsible. While the investigation is ongoing, no group has claimed responsibility. However, Valle del Cauca Governor Dilian Francisca Toro condemned the bombing, calling it a 'terrorist attack." She added, 'Terrorism will not defeat us." The Colombian Air Force released an official statement, saying, 'At this time, efforts are underway to verify the damage to facilities and personnel, as well as the investigation to determine the causes and perpetrators of this terrorist act, which threatens civilians and the lives of the men and women who serve Colombians from the Air Force." Colombia has seen a rise in violence in recent months. In June, leftist guerrillas claimed responsibility for attacks around Cali that left seven people dead. On Thursday, a separate incident in Antioquia department resulted in eight deaths during clashes between guerrilla fighters and police officers. Authorities have not yet confirmed who was behind that attack. 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. Loading comments...
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
PWD takes possession of disputed Imambara in M.P.'s Dhar; heavy force deployed
The Public Works Department (PWD) of the Madhya Pradesh Government has taken the possession of a disputed Imambara from the local Muslim community in Dhar district under heavy police protection, authorities said on Thursday (August 21, 2025). A large number of personnel remain deployed in the area. On the intervening night of August 19 and 20, the PWD took possession of the long-disputed property from the local Tazia Committee over a month after the local Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) ruled in the favour of the department. The local Tazia Committee has challenged the move in the Supreme Court. Dhar Superintendent of Police (SP) Manoj Kumar Singh told The Hindu that at least 1,500 security personnel, including one company of the Special Task Force (STF) and two companies of the Special Armed Forces (SAF), and surveillance from neighbouring buildings as well as drones. The multi-layered security arrangements remain in place given the sensitivity of the matter, he added. A local Hindu body, Sanskritik Dharohar Raksha Manch Samiti had been running a campaign to get it vacated since 2021 and has submitted requests to the district administration. Earlier this year, the district administration issued a notice to the Tazia Committee, prompting the body to move the Madhya Pradesh High Court against it. However, in April, 2025, the High Court directed the Dhar SDM to decide on the matter, who after hearing representation from the concerned sides, declared in the favour of the PWD on July 14. The Muslim body approached the Divisional Commissioner against the order which was turned down, prompting it to move the Supreme Court. Mr. Singh said, 'The building used to be the property of the Dhar ruler earlier and had been under the control of the PWD since the independence. In 1973, the Tazia Committee took it on rent for about two weeks to prepare the Muharram tazias and has been in their possession ever since.' He said that for a month after the SDM court's order, the police and the administration had held several meetings with community leaders and bodies from both Hindu and Muslim communities to ensure that the possession can be taken peacefully. 'The situation is peaceful in the area but we have kept the security cover to prevent any incident,' he said. Dhar has been communally sensitive for years due to multiple religious disputes, including the famous Bhojshala-Kamal Maula mosque dispute between the Hindu and Muslim communities.
