Jharkhand villagers shun online PDS scheme due to network issues
The online Public Distribution System (PDS) in Jharkhand has become a headache for many, especially for those living in far-flung areas where network issues persist.
 
To check corruption in the PDS scheme, an online process was introduced in the state whereby the beneficiaries have to put their thumb impression on the machine kept at the ration shop to get the foodgrains under the scheme.
 
But, the machine operates on a network, and clear weather is a must for the machine to catch signals. Hence, ration is denied to the people on several occasions. 
 
In Tilma village of Khunti district, Kariya Munda and other villagers often spend their day at the ration shop waiting for the network so that they can get their foodgrains. 
 
"Every day, my son asks when will they get lunch or dinner to which I reply that unless the network is accessed, they cannot get proper food," Kariya said. 
 
Not only in Khunti, but other parts of the state are also suffering due to poor network. In Dumka and Chaibaasa, people have to even climb tress to get the network. The network doesn't catch sometimes due to heavy rains, sometimes when the server is down or for other issues.
 
Ration dealer Sunita Purty said "unless the thumb impression is made, the ration cannot be given. The online system prevents ration distribution without thumb impression".
 
For the last few days, the villagers are making rounds for getting foodgrains from the PDS shops. They can be seen roaming along the roads with the machine and antenna, in search of network. Many times their efforts fail following which the ration is denied.
 
An angry villager said the manual system was better as there is no improvement in the online system and their children are suffering.
 
Women said they had to leave behind their farm work to come to the ration shops where they have to wait for long hours.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • User

    COMMENTS

    Anil Kumar

    2 weeks ago

    Wow. Wasn't aware this level of digitization at village level - ration disbursal basis bio metrics!

    Beware! Reliance Jio Is Not Giving ‘Sarkari Naukri’. This Is Fraud by SMS Jobs
    While unemployment remains a big concern, fraudsters are finding new ways to cheat youngsters under the pretext of giving a job in Reliance Jio. But a quick glance at the ‘appointment and other letters’ provided by these job-providers reveal that it is nothing but a new fraud in the market using name of Jio. 
     
    The letters, we have seen, shows names of Reliance Jio and ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) along with a logo of Anil Dhirubhai Ambani (ADA) group's Reliance on the letterhead. The appointment is valid for 40 years. It says, "...abovenamed candidate is appointed as director at par with government job in at Reliance Jio by the MIB, at a monthly salary of Rs32,500, inclusive of all perks and benefits!"
     
     
    What is wrong with this job offer is that both Reliance Jio and ADA Reliance group are private companies and cannot offer anyone a job in the government. Similarly, the ministry cannot appoint anyone in either Reliance Jio or any other private company. Also, having the logos of both Ambani groups that have split after a nasty public war is another give-away! 
     
    Another letter is designed to look like a legal document and has a photo of prime-minister Narendra Modi with Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) chairman Mukesh Ambani and his wife, Nita. This letter also has two stamps, one with a round stamp (known as seal) of Reliance Jio Ltd, Pune, Maharashtra written on it and other with some address mentioned on it. 
     
     
    The next letter reveals the scam in this ‘job offer’. It gives two bank account numbers with IFSC codes and names of Ravi and Mithun Gajanan Patil, as the persons for depositing security money within 12 hours after receiving the letter. It also threatens to cancel the offer and initiate action against the recipient in the Delhi or Bengaluru High Court.
     
     
    We found that this fraud starts by sending an SMS to any mobile number. The text in the SMS says, "[Dear customer you are selected in reliance jio company ltd must be submitted aadhar card ,passport size photo, signature, last qualification marksheet & perosnal contact no. send this-what's no -7634927540 email id:reliancejiosmsjob.com contact-8579877547]."
     
     
    An official from Reliance Jio admitted to encountering instances of similar frauds from across the country. "We have also put out notice on our website in different languages. We will approach the police and get necessary complaints lodged (in this case)," the official says. 
     
    On further probing, we came across a website named reliancejiosmsjobs.com, which calls itself a "digital marketing company registered under the ministry of corporate affairs." It says, it promotes its clients through SMS marketing by mobile phone or the Internet and the registered user just needs to send his/her promotional matter to a list of mobile numbers provided by the portal.
     
     
    The website offers three types of jobs—SMS job, data entry and advertisement post—for which the user need to pay Rs2,500 each to apply. It says this money is a registration fee and security deposit, so that "if a candidate quits all of a sudden, the company does not have to face any loss due to his/her incomplete work. The registration fee for plan-A is refunded after 6 months of joining and for plan-b it is refunded after 2 months of joining."
     
    After Moneylife complained to Reliance Jio about the website and shared documents of the job offer, the company seems to have taken action. The website has now become inaccessible. However, it is not known if there was any arrest in this case. In any case, those seeking a job should be careful and not fall prey to such job scams.
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    Bombay High Court Blocks Coastal Road Project for now; Asks for New Environmental Clearances
    The Bombay High Court today has upheld the claim in a set of petitions that the ambitious, eight-lane, 29.2km long coastal road project, connecting Churchgate in the south and Kandivili in the north, needs proper environmental clearances.
     
    The bench of Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice NM Jamdar stayed the Rs14,000-crore project and quashed the CRZ (coastal regulation zone) clearances granted to it.
     
    Although the municipal corporation had claimed that it had a final clearance from ministry of environment, forest and climate change on 11 November 2017, senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas, appearing for the petitioners, said this was a faulty and illegal green clearance.
     
    There was already a stay on construction of the project during the hearing, but today’s order will put an end to the project until the government obtains fresh clearances. 
     
    This is a big victory for the petitioners, who include two leading fishermen associations (Worli Koliwada Nakwa and Worli Machimar Sarvodaya) Conservation Action Trust, Society for Improvement, Greenery, and Nature, Vanashakti and activists like Prakash Laxman Chandekar, Debi Goenka who took the initiative. 
     
    The coastal road is planned to be a 29.2km stretch, connecting Churchgate in the south and Kandivili in the north. The project had to take permissions from various bodies and it received it’s final clearance from ministry of environment, forest and climate change (MoEFCC) on 11 November 2017.

    The petitioners requested for stopping the execution of this project due to the increasing threat to environment and the adverse effect it will have on the coral and marine life of the region especially the geomorphological features of coastline and the degradation of sensitive coastal vegetation. The interests of the fishermen and people at large were ignored, they argued. 
     
    The government argued that this action the coastal road would reduce pollution, by saving as much as three hours of travel which, today causes eye irritation, bronchitis, cough and other ailments. 
     
    In spite of the fact that the project had received permissions and fulfilled the required standards informed by various bodies, the court found it essential for the project to require the environmental clearance under environmental impact assessment (EIA) notification. 
     
    In April this year, the High Court had restrained the BMC from carrying out any further work on the project. This prompted BMC to file an appeal in the Supreme Court.
     
    In May, the Supreme Court allowed the corporation to carry out existing work but prohibited it from carrying out any new work. It had also directed the Bombay High Court to take up the matter for final hearing. 
     
    And today, on 16th July, in the Bombay High Court, the bench said:
     
    “We hold that there is a lack of proper scientific study and this has been overlooked by MCZMA(Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority), EIA (Environmental Assessment Report) and MoEF warranting the approval granted by MCZMA on 4th January 2017, the approval granted by EAC on 17th March 2017 and the final approval granted by MoEF on 11th May, 2017 are liable to be quashed and set aside. We quash the decision taken by MCZMA on 4th January 2017 and the approval granted by MoEF on 11th May 2017 on said ground alone.”
     
    It declared that MCGM cannot proceed with the work without obtaining the Environment clearance and further permission under Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. 
     
    The Court also observed that “it is settled law that an administrative or a statutory decision has to be taken by the Executive after properly applying its mind to all relevant material which ought to be in the mind of the authority while taking the decision. Both MCZMA and MoEF have not taken into account, in spite of being informed, that the Metro Rail Project in Mumbai was under construction and the Metro Network to be constructed would run parallel to the proposed coastal road. It was covering the entire South-North of the city. The impact of the Metro of being able to transport commuters was extremely necessary and important keeping in mind that the reclamation of land to construct a coastal road is permitted only in an exceptional case, and as opined by us, to determine whether a case was an exceptional case warranted the same to be considered from the point of view of a crying need of the city bordering the dying need of the city.”
     
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    Sudhir Jatar

    1 month ago

    All we are asking is to be within the law and not take shortcuts just because it helps if large amounts are spent

    Lalit Mulay

    1 month ago

    Without any prejudice on High Court . I think they hurried towards their decision.
    Fishermen go very deep into the sea for fishing .They don’t fish on the coast line.Is there any study done by the petitioners to know how much fishes fishermen have catched in last 10 years from where the coastal road is going to get built? what income did they received by selling those fishes ?if they have received good income have they paid any taxes to the govt.?When companies like ONGC extract any gas from a sea they have to pay charges to the Indian Govt. Petitioners are firing the bullets by keeping the gun on fishermen shoulders. I am unable to know how are fishes even breathing in our coastline when all the untreated sewage water of Mumbai viz 2 billion litres per day is thrown in the same sea from last 40 years. Have petitioners filed a case against the BMC for that ? Also where was high court when project was cleared by environmental ministry in 2017 ? How can you stop a project which is awarded after getting environmental clearance ? Is there any kind of negative environmental report from NGT,IIT or NEERI? What about the investors who have invested & taken up this project .So tomorrow if this investors put a case against BMC for their losses and if BMC loses the case from whose pocket bmc is going to pay ? This will make a negative impact on foreign investors who wants to invest in infrastructure projects in India? It is not question of how much traffic will be diverted . you cannot dig a well when you are thirsty? you need to have a vision considering increase of traffic in next 100 years. Look at the busiest railway station i.e CST which was built by Britishers more than 100 years back . The population then was hardly anything but even today you don't find the station overcrowded or messy. That's the vision. They had considered the traffic keeping 100 years in mind. After some days if high court gives a green signal for this project and if the cost increases from 14k Cr to 17kCr are petitioner going to pay the difference amount to build the road ?

    REPLY

    ROHIT SAXENA

    In Reply to Lalit Mulay 1 month ago

    Its the duty of the proposer of the project to do the impact study. Petitioner does not have obligation to prove negative impact if no study is done by project proposer.

    Sudhir Jatar

    In Reply to Lalit Mulay 1 month ago

    There are scientific ways to work out the future traffic in the next 10, 20, 30 years and so on. This has to be done to support the necessity to spend so much of the public money. We have had instances in Pune where the municipal corporation built flyovers costing more that 100 crores to reduce congestion. But the effect was opposite although we had filed a PIL in the High Court right at the start that the Detailed Project Report was fudged and it is already a decade but the flyover has only added to the congestion. Hopefully our PIL will soon be heard fo the final hearing. There is another case where a pedestrian overbridge was built and after about five years it was demolished because there was hardly any usage. The columns were successful in blocking the footpaths at both ends!

    P M Ravindran

    1 month ago

    @1000 cr per km of the road it is indeed a high cost to the exchequer. With that kind of money wouldn't it be possible to redevelop slums and find land for improving the suburban railway system? I had even read suggestions to the effect of doubling the rake length and stopping the train with half the rakes on platforms alternately, that is the front half in station 1,3,5 etc and the rear half on platforms 2,4,6 etc. Equally important is the need to decongest Mumbai. How about shifting the capital itself to somewhere near the center of the state? Not a thuglakan idea with the possibilities available these days.

    As far as the decision of the Mumbai High Court is concerned I can only say that, as usual, our judges seem to be under the impression that they are the only sensible persons in this country and even that they God's own gift to the les mserables like us. Otherwise how can they rubbish the decisions of three competent authorities like MCZMA, EAC and MoEF?

    REPLY

    ROHIT SAXENA

    In Reply to P M Ravindran 1 month ago

    Point raised by Court regarding not taking Metro development into account make sense IMHO. Given the cost of project, will it not be better to invest in public transport?

    Sudhir Jatar

    1 month ago

    We have scrutinised the Detailed Project Report (DPR). It has not established the need for the coastal road (CR). The objectives have not been quantified accurately e.g. the number of vehicles that will be diverted to the CR in a given time frame from the existing parallel roads. The Objective as stated in the Report: “This report presents studies carried out under guidance of Hon’ble Additional Municipal Commissioner (Eastern Suburb) to verify feasibility of the proposed coastal road and recommendations for detailed design stage of the project.” The aim of making this road is not quantified and the objective shows that the GoM or BMC has already made up its mind to make the CR. This is the most unprofessional objective anyone can come across ever and anywhere. One does not write, “under the guidance of Hon’ble Additional Commissioner” when this worthy is not qualified enough to make a DPR.
    The Origin-Destination (OD) survey does not include “willingness to use the road” as one of the questions. The consultant has assumed that all commuters would use the CR. In fact, the surveys have not been conducted as per the Indian Roads Congress codes and mandates.
    For all costly projects, it is essential to first work out the feasibility for any alternatives that may exist. This is a major drawback of the DPR. Here the issue is not ‘for’ or ‘against’. It is whether the CR is needed and if so, at what cost?
    The other drawbacks in traffic surveys are; i) Sample size not given, ii) Speed & Delay (S&D) survey done only on one corridor, iii) S&D survey not attached, iv) In the OD survey, type of vehicles counted and sample size is not given, v) The format and questionnaire including willingness for using CR not given, vi) Classified volume count done but categorisation not given. Only total number of vehicles are given.
    Impact of Ganesh idols immersion on the tunnel both due to weight, change in soil conditions and social repercussions when certain beaches will not be available for immersion have not been considered.
    In paragraph 15.9 “Conclusion from Economic analysis and Financial analysis”, it is stated, “From the economic analysis results it may be concluded that, the construction of the proposed Coastal road may be considered as economically viable.” However, paragraph 13.7 shows a negative Economic IRR at -2.55 % with a meagre 1.47 % as Project IRR:There is further confusion in the statement that follows in Paragraph 15.9, “From the Financial analysis results it may be concluded that, the construction of the proposed Coastal is road financially not viable on BOT Basis.”

    JAYENDRA PANDYA

    1 month ago

    Without any prejudice for court's order and with due respect to judiciary...

    Prima facie, it appears that court has taken its decision in hurry and moreover it is over exceeding its jurisdiction in quashing the decision of ministry. If the ministry has cleared the project, how can court hold "that there is a lack of proper scientific study and this has been overlooked by MCZMA (Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority), EIA (Environmental Assessment Report) and MoEF".

    Those who are opposing & stalling it should be taken to other countries and shown the benefits of such projects. Some of the petitioners who are opposing the project has themselves reclaimed the sea-bed and established housing colonies and thereby endangered the environment. Take the examples of Colaba, Mahim, Versova, Marve, etc.

    One has to use their judgement taking into account the overall impact of this project. If the petitioners have scientific study about the environment degradation of such project it should be tabled before the ministry and debated.

    Simply opposing and stalling it will overshoot the budget of such a large project and ultimately its burden will be on the citizens.

    Let us hope that the said project is decided on its merits. Sooner the better.

    M. T. Chiddarwar

    1 month ago

    Such individuals and organisations are funded by anti India groups

    We are listening!

    Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
      Loading...
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email

    BUY NOW

    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 3 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)