Here's the first phase flight plan for return of Indian nationals stranded abroad

coastaldigest.com news network
May 5, 2020

Newsroom, May 5: Following the union government's nod, preparations are afoot to bring back Indian nationals stranded abroad from May 7 onwards.

According to sources, in the first phase from May 7- 14, the government would allow more than 60 “non-scheduled, commercial” flights to operate from about 12 countries to India to bring back 15,000 citizens. At least half of those flights will be from the Gulf region, including UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman, while the rest would bring passengers from the U.S., the U.K., Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines and Bangladesh.

The flights would be spread over 10 States identified as having the largest numbers to return, with Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Delhi (NCR) receiving the maximum number of flights.

A meeting held at the Ministry of Civil Aviation looked specifically at flights, mainly operated by Air India, while it awaits a final plan from countries where Indians need to be airlifted from. The first flights planned at present are from Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Riyadh and Doha, flying directly to Kozhikode and Kochi.

While the full estimate of Indians needing to return home could cross ten lakhs (a million), with more than two lakhs having registered to return from the UAE alone, officials said their return would be “prioritised and staggered”.

Flight plan for return of Indian nationals stranded abroad:

Comments

Anwar
 - 
Thursday, 7 May 2020

for Kyrgyzstan

 

https://indembbishkek.gov.in/pages.php?id=226

Anwar
 - 
Thursday, 7 May 2020

For malasia

 

https://hcikl.gov.in/indreg

Prathaban
 - 
Wednesday, 6 May 2020

How to apply malaysia pls give me a registration link

Anwar
 - 
Wednesday, 6 May 2020

For Singapore

https://www.hcisingapore.gov.in/indian_registration

Anwar
 - 
Wednesday, 6 May 2020

Please contact embassy or ministry

Saudi details are here:

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSc_yyVAYPD-VYH98RNOWZkDkGKVsf34qnu0oGoLdtts3RG7_Q/viewform
 

http://www.coastaldigest.com/news/indians-stuck-saudi-arabia-due-lockdown-ought-know-these-things-returning-home

Kotadiya vinit…
 - 
Wednesday, 6 May 2020

I am in singapore 

 

And now my study finished already so how to go back india

Shipra
 - 
Wednesday, 6 May 2020

Please share a link to how to Register 

Rishi kumar sonkar
 - 
Tuesday, 5 May 2020

We want to go back india we are in Kyrgyzstan

how to registe…
 - 
Tuesday, 5 May 2020

how to register ?please share link/details

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 15,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 15: Bengaluru Commissioner of Police, Bhaskar Rao, said that prohibitory order under Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, will remain in place for all parts of the City Commissionerate till April 20.

Section 144 of CrPC prohibits the assembly of four or more people in an area.

"Prohibitory order under section 144 of CrPC will remain in force, in all parts of the Bengaluru City Commissionerate for a period up to 12 am of April 20 with effect from 12 am of April 14," according to Rao.

Karnataka, so far, has 258 confirmed COVID-19 cases, with 9 deaths being reported due to the infection, according to the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on Tuesday.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 23,2020

Expressing concern over the ban imposed on TikTok by the government of India, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has reportedly called the development in the south Asian country “worrisome”.

TikTok was amongst the 59 Chinese apps that were banned in India but why it hogs the maximum limelight because TikTok had the second-largest user base in India with over 200 million users.

As per The Verge writer Casey Newton, Zuckerberg was worried about TikTok’s India ban. Although it soon cashed into the opportunity and released a TikTok clone “Reels”, the government’s reason behind banning the app in India wasn’t received well by Mark Zuckerberg. 

He had said that if India can ban a platform with over 200 million users in India without citing concrete reasons, it can also ban Facebook if something goes amiss on the security and privacy front.

Why Mark finds it particularly worrisome because Facebook is already involved in a lot tussle with the governments across the world involving national security concerns. 

“Facebook already faces fights around the world from governments on both the left and the right related to issues that fit under the broad umbrella of national security: election interference, influence campaigns, hate speech, and even just plain-old democratic speech. Zuckerberg knows that the leap from banning TikTok on national security grounds to banning Facebook on national security grounds is more of a short hop,” the report by Casey read.

Facebook till now has not faced any kind of issue in India but considering the debacle with the other governments, it is not entirely wrong to worry about its future in India if any national security issue arises. Back in 2016, Facebook’s Free Basics service, which means a free but restricted internet service, was banned in India by the telecom regulators. 

The TRAI had said that the Free Basic services were banned in India because it violated the principles of net neutrality. With Free Basics services, Facebook had planned to bring more unconnected users online. But since 2016, there has been no major tussle between the Indian government and Zuckerberg due to national security issues.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 16,2020

New Delhi, Jan 16: In trouble brewing for the Gautam Adani-led M/S Adani Enterprises, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Thursday said that it has registered a case against former officials of the National Co-operative Consumer Federation (NCCF) and others over alleged irregularities in supply of coal to the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation (APGENCO) in 2010.

The CBI in its FIR has named Virendra Singh, the then Chairman of the NCCF, G P Gupta, the then MD of the NCCF, S C Singhal, the then Senior Advisor of NCCF, Adani Enterprises Ltd and other unknown public servants and others for criminal conspiracy, cheating and criminal misconduct by public servants.

According to CBI, the case was filed on Wednesday after the preliminary enquiry revealed the crime by the officials named in the FIR and the Adani Enterprises was found to be true.

The FIR alleged that on June 26, 2010, APGENCO floated a tender enquiry for supply of six lakh metric tonnes of imported coal "on free on rail destination" basis to Dr Narla Tata Rao Thermal Station (NTTPS), Vijaywada and Rayalasaleema Thermal Power Plant (RTTP), Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh/RTPP via Kakinada-Vizag-Chennai-Krishnapatnam or any other ports

The same was forwarded by the Chief Engineer, APGENCO to seven PSUs -- PEC Limited, STC Limited, MSTC Limited, NCCF, MMTC, Coal India Limited and SCCL Limited.

The FIR alleged that during the probe, the Adani Enterprises used a proxy company to get the supply contract. It said, "NCCF received bids from six companies -- Adani Enterprises Ltd, Maheshwari Brothers Coal Limited (MBCL), Vyom Trade Links Pvt. Ltd, Swarana Projects Pvt. Ltd, Gupta Coal India Ltd and Kyori Oremen Ltd.

During investigation it was found that Gupta Coal India Ltd had quoted the NCCF margin of 11.3 percent, while the MBCL quoted the margin of 2.25 percent and rest did not quote any margin to the NCCF.

The FIR said the quotes of the Gupta Coal India Ltd, Kyori Oremen Ltd and Swarana Projects Pvt. Ltd were rejected by the NCCF as they were not found to be fulfilling the tender conditions.

"Post tender negotiation was done by senior officials of NCCF to give undue favour to Adani Enterprises Ltd despite it not qualifing the tender (terms)," the FIR said, adding instead of cancelling the bid of Adani Enterprise Ltd, senior management of NCCF conveyed the offer margin to the company through one of its representative -- Munish Sehgal, who was sitting in the NCCF head office. It is prima facie evident that when the bids were being processed at NCCF head office in Delhi, a representative of Adani Enterprises Ltd. was informed regarding their imminent rejection due to non-submission of NCCF margin and also that MBCL was eligible bidder quoted 2.25 percent margin," it alleged.

The CBI in its FIR, further alleged that Adani Enterprises Ltd. had given an unsecured loan of Rs 16.81 crore to Vyom Trade Links Ltd in 2008-09. "And further it was revealed that the bank guarantees of the Adani Enterprises Ltd. and Vyom Trade Links Ltd. were issues by the same branch of the State Bank of India and at the same time," it said.

"It was clear that Adani Enterprises Ltd. presented Vyom Trade Links Ltd. as a proxy company in this particular tender and Vyom Trade Links Ltd. later withdrew its offer on flimsy ground," the CBI FIR said.

"The aforesaid acts of commissions and omissions on the part of the senior management of the NCCF disclose that during their tenure, they acted in a manner unbecoming of public servants and committed irregularities by way of manipulation in the selection of bidders, thereby giving undue favours to Adani Enterprises Ltd. in award of work for supply of coal to APGENCO despite its disqualification," it added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.