File photo: MP CM Mohan Yadav (Picture credit: PTI)

NEW DELHI: Madhya Pradesh chief minister Mohan Yadav on Friday announced strict action against senior civic officials over the contaminated drinking water incident in Indore’s Bhagirathpura area, saying negligence would not be tolerated.In a post on X late Friday, the chief minister said Rohit Sisonia, additional commissioner of the Indore Municipal Corporation, and Sanjeev Srivastava, executive engineer in charge of the public health engineering (PHE) department, had been suspended. He also said instructions had been issued to remove Dilip Kumar Yadav, the commissioner of the Indore Municipal Corporation.“The state government will not tolerate negligence in the incident caused by contaminated drinking water in Bhagirathpura, Indore. Strict decisions are being taken in this regard,” Yadav said in his post.The chief minister had earlier ordered disciplinary action following an outbreak of diarrhoea and vomiting linked to contaminated water in the area. The outbreak has affected more than 1,400 people over the past nine days. While local residents have claimed that 15 people, including a six-month-old baby, died, the health department has confirmed four deaths so far, news agency PTI reported.Yadav reviewed the situation with the chief secretary and senior officials and directed that show-cause notices be issued to the municipal commissioner and additional commissioner. He also ordered the immediate transfer of the additional commissioner from Indore and the withdrawal of water distribution responsibilities from the in-charge superintending engineer.Laboratory tests have confirmed that the outbreak was caused by contaminated drinking water, PTI reported, citing officials. A leakage was found in a main water supply pipeline near a police outpost in Bhagirathpura, at a spot over which a toilet had been constructed, leading to contamination.Officials said clean water supply has since been restored after repairs, though residents have been advised to boil water as a precaution. The state government has also directed officials to prepare a time-bound plan to prevent similar incidents elsewhere in Madhya Pradesh.

Technology billionaires were at the forefront of the advance, with sustained enthusiasm around artificial intelligence driving gains in US mega-cap shares. (AI image)

Did you know that the world’s wealthiest and richest 500 people added a whopping $2.2 trillion to their wealth in 2025? The rise was a result of powerful rallies across global markets ranging from stocks and digital assets to precious metals, data from the Bloomberg Billionaires Index shows. As a result, the aggregate net worth expanded to $11.9 trillion in 2025.Technology billionaires were at the forefront of the advance, with sustained enthusiasm around artificial intelligence driving gains in US mega-cap shares. Roughly 25% of the total increase tracked by Bloomberg’s index was generated by just eight people. Among them were Oracle Chairman Larry Ellison, Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk, Alphabet co-founder Larry Page and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Even so, their share of overall gains was smaller than a year earlier, when the same group accounted for 43%.This surge got a booster shot after Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election in late 2024, while concerns over tariffs caused only a brief interruption. In April, a sharp market selloff triggered the largest single-day erosion of billionaire wealth since the pandemic, but the setback proved temporary.At the start of the year, Musk stood clearly apart as the most prominent figure among the ultra-wealthy. He stepped into the political arena in a significant way after contributing close to $300 million to Trump’s re-election bid and spent much of early 2025 in Washington, DC, leading efforts aimed at reducing government spending.By year-end, however, it was Ellison who emerged as the standout. A sharp rise in Oracle’s share price, driven by increased investment in artificial intelligence by the cloud computing firm, briefly pushed him past Musk in September to become the world’s richest person. Although Oracle stock later retreated by about 40% from its highs, Ellison remained in the spotlight due to his role in the Paramount Skydance Corp. offer, led by his son David Ellison, to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery Inc.The wealth expansion was not limited to the US. While the S&P 500 Index gained 17% for the year through December 30, it lagged behind a 22% rise in Britain’s FTSE 100 and a 29% advance in Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index.Performance across other asset classes was even stronger. Precious metals delivered one of their strongest showings in decades as investors sought safety, while copper and rare earths gained strategic importance amid geopolitical tensions. This boosted the fortunes of major commodity holders such as Australian mining tycoon Gina Rinehart and Chile’s Luksic family by billions of dollars.Cryptocurrencies also appeared set to outperform equities for much of the year. Bitcoin jumped to record levels following Trump’s election victory and extended its rally after the administration rolled out policies seen as supportive of the sector. That momentum reversed sharply in October, when a steep selloff erased all earlier gains and more, sharply cutting the wealth of crypto-focused billionaires including the Winklevoss twins, Changpeng Zhao and Michael Saylor.Here is a list of 2025’s biggest winners and losers, as prepared by Bloomberg:Larry Ellison – Winner

At 81, the Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison has stepped more deeply into the company’s daily operations, steering its aggressive and highly leveraged expansion into artificial intelligence infrastructure. Ellison’s personal wealth jumped sharply on September 10, rising by $89 billion in a single day after Oracle posted blockbuster quarterly results linked to its AI strategy. This marked the largest one-day increase in net worth recorded by Bloomberg’s wealth index at the time.Beyond technology, Ellison has been channeling capital into the media space, including personally backing the equity component of his son David’s $108 billion hostile bid for Warner Bros. Oracle’s ambition to play a central role in the proposed $500 billion Stargate AI infrastructure initiative, along with plans to take an ownership stake in TikTok’s US business, could further influence Ellison’s fortune well into 2026 and beyond.Elon Musk – Winner

Elon Musk emerged as the largest political contributor during the 2024 election cycle and spent much of the spring in Washington, where his Department of Government Efficiency drove deep budget cuts and large-scale workforce reductions across federal agencies. That period weighed on his personal wealth, as Tesla shares came under pressure, partly reflecting consumer backlash against his political involvement.His fortunes improved after he exited the White House following a very public rift with Donald Trump. A recent insider transaction at SpaceX lifted the company’s valuation to the highest level ever for a private firm, pushing Musk’s net worth past the $600 billion mark for the first time. Separately, Tesla investors approved a revised pay package that positions him to potentially become the world’s first trillionaire, provided the electric vehicle maker achieves an ambitious set of performance milestones in the years ahead.Gina Rinehart – Winner

Australia’s wealthiest individual emerged as one of the biggest beneficiaries of the global push to secure access to strategically critical rare-earth minerals. Through her privately owned firm Hancock Prospecting, Rinehart has built the largest rare-earth holdings outside China, placing her at the center of an intensifying geopolitical contest over materials that underpin industries such as semiconductors and electric vehicles.Her influence has extended beyond mining. Rinehart has appeared at events hosted at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and holds an investment in Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., the listed company that operates the social media platform Truth Social. In the three months through June 30, she expanded that stake by roughly two-thirds.Donald Trump and family – Winner

Since launching his campaign for a second term, Donald Trump and his family have pursued a wide range of commercial ventures that have significantly boosted their collective wealth, reaching levels rarely seen in modern US political history. Despite a recent pullback, the family’s fortune has risen by around 70% over the past 15 months.In the period leading up to Trump’s second inauguration, he and First Lady Melania Trump promoted two memecoins branded with their names. While those tokens initially surged before retreating, the Trump-branded coin alone has contributed more than $200 million to the family’s net worth, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Weeks before the 2024 election, Trump also helped launch the crypto platform World Liberty Financial alongside his sons. Since then, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump have expanded into digital asset ventures, including cryptocurrency mining company American Bitcoin Corp.A major holding for the family, their stake in Trump Media, jumped in value in December following the announcement of a merger with nuclear fusion firm TAE Technologies, though the shares remain more than 70% below their January peak. Trump also notched a legal win in August when an appeals court overturned a $464 million civil fraud penalty, even as it upheld findings that he had violated the law by overstating the value of assets such as the Mar-a-Lago resort.Manuel Villar – Loser

Manuel Villar, who previously held the title of the Philippines’ richest individual, suffered a dramatic erosion of wealth after shares of his real estate firm, Golden MV Holdings Inc., collapsed shortly after trading resumed in November. The stock fell by more than 80% within days of the end of a six-month suspension, wiping out over $18 billion from Villar’s fortune.The trading halt had been imposed when Golden MV failed to submit financial statements following disclosures that the company had purchased a parcel of land from Villar for $93 million, only to later mark its value at over $23 billion. Adding to the pressure, Villar earlier this month exited his entire holding in water utility PrimeWater, selling the stake to retail magnate Lucio Co. PrimeWater had come under government scrutiny in July over alleged “irregularities.”Bob Pender and Mike Sabel – Loser

The long-anticipated revival in US initial public offerings suffered a setback with the underwhelming market debut of liquefied natural gas exporter Venture Global Inc. After several slow years for new listings, the company’s January IPO was widely seen as a potential catalyst for a stronger issuance pipeline, supported by a pro-business administration and a sizable backlog of deals.Ahead of the flotation, co-founders Bob Pender and Mike Sabel were expected to each hold equity stakes valued at close to $30 billion, as Venture Global was positioned to deliver the largest energy IPO in more than a decade. That optimism quickly faded. Weak investor appetite forced the company to scale back the offering, and the share price has since plunged more than 70%, weighed down by underwhelming quarterly results and the loss of a major arbitration case against BP Plc, one of its largest customers.Michael Saylor – Loser

For much of the first half of the year, Michael Saylor’s Strategy Inc. stood out as a major beneficiary of the cryptocurrency boom. Digital assets surged to record levels following Donald Trump’s election victory in November 2024 and extended those gains as the new administration implemented a series of policies supportive of the sector. Strategy was at the forefront of the so-called crypto treasury approach, accumulating large quantities of Bitcoin on its balance sheet while repeatedly issuing equity to fund further purchases.That strategy delivered outsized gains through early October, when Bitcoin reached new peaks. Momentum then reversed. A sharp pullback in the cryptocurrency triggered a steep sell-off in Strategy’s shares, which fell by more than 50%, erasing nearly $6 billion from Saylor’s wealth compared with its earlier high.Wang Xing – Loser

Wang Xing, co-founder and chairman of Meituan, experienced a significant drop in personal wealth during 2025 as pressures mounted on China’s leading food delivery company. His net worth slid close to 31% after Meituan reported its first quarterly loss in nearly three years in November.The setback came despite a strong year for Chinese equities, with the Shanghai Composite Index rising 18%. Meituan has been weighed down by softer domestic consumer spending and intensifying competition from Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and JD.com Inc. To counter slowing growth at home, the company has accelerated its push into international markets, recently expanding operations into Brazil and the Middle East.

GHAZIABAD: The latest flashpoint in a bitter family feud was the decision of former Indian Air Force officer Yogesh Kumar to sell his house. “Kumar had asked both his sons to vacate the house,” said Loni ACP Siddharth Gautam, setting off a chain of events that ended in his murder the day after Christmas.Police have identified the killers as a Kaushambi-based constable, Naveen Kumar, and a 32-year-old man from Bulandshahr, both hired by Kumar’s sons, Nitesh and Guddu. The two sons allegedly provided the hitmen with Rs 5 lakh to carry out the attack. Naveen Kumar and the sons are currently absconding. The Bulandshahr man, who had a criminal past as a juvenile, has been arrested.The arrested man had been convicted in the infamous 2008 Barari massacre, in which he killed seven members of his uncle’s family, including a pregnant aunt and a two-year-old cousin. At the time, he was just 15 and sent to a correction home, while his father, the main accused, was sentenced to death in 2016. He has been living in Ghaziabad for several years and was a neighbour of Kumar in Ashok Vihar, Loni.Police said the accused had a personal grudge against Kumar, including disputes over feeding stray dogs in the locality, which made him an easy target for Nitesh and Guddu’s plan.Kumar had retired as an assistant warrant officer on July 31 last year. Police said the sons were motivated by a desire to access their father’s “hefty savings” and feared losing control over the property.According to police, the murder was meticulously planned. CCTV footage showed the accused and Naveen riding a Hero Xtreme bike on the day of the crime, their faces masked. Although the bike’s number plate had been removed, police traced its owner, who revealed it had been borrowed “to go shopping.” The accused was arrested from his residence, where he lives with his wife and two children. Naveen and the sons remain at large.ACP Gautam detailed the attack: “Nitesh and Guddu planned the murder with the accused on the terrace of Kumar’s house. The accused knew Naveen, who is a UP Police constable but had been on leave since August 2025. On the day of the murder, the accused hit Kumar with an iron rod. When Kumar fell to the ground, Naveen shot him in the head first. The accused fired a second bullet.” The attack occurred just 50 meters from Kumar’s house.An FIR has been registered at Loni police station, invoking murder charges along with sections of the Arms Act. Police are continuing the investigation to apprehend the remaining accused and probe whether the attack was premeditated or influenced by other disputes.

Zohran Mamdani’s inaugural address was notable not for its length or flourish, but for how explicitly it challenged the governing assumptions New York has lived with for years. Instead of emphasising constraints, he foregrounded ambition. Instead of defending incrementalism, he framed it as failure. And instead of presenting affordability as an unfortunate by-product of global forces, he treated it as a problem government has actively chosen not to confront.The speech was light on implementation detail, but heavy on direction. Read closely, it sets out a governing philosophy built around direct cost relief, public provision, and an openly confrontational posture towards institutions that block change.

Here is what Mamdani said, and what it actually means.

Resetting expectations: rejecting the politics of caution

“In writing this address, I have been told that this is the occasion to reset expectations, that I should use this opportunity to encourage the people of New York to ask for little and expect even less. I will do no such thing. The only expectation I seek to reset is that of small expectations.”What this signals:This is Mamdani’s clearest break from recent administrations. New York governance has increasingly been shaped by expectation management. Leaders promise process, cite constraints, and treat boldness as irresponsibility.Mamdani rejects that logic outright. He is not promising that everything will succeed. He is promising that failure will not be pre-empted by timidity. This line sets the tone for a mayoralty that prefers visible effort over quiet restraint.

Using state power unapologetically

“To those who insist that the era of big government is over, hear me when I say this: No longer will City Hall hesitate to use its power to improve New Yorkers’ lives.”What this signals: This is a direct rebuttal to the post-1990s consensus that city governments should defer to markets and limit intervention. Mamdani is arguing that government’s failure has not been overreach, but underuse of authority.The emphasis here is not on expanding government for its own sake, but on abandoning hesitation. It foreshadows regulatory fights, public provision, and policies that test the limits of what City Hall can do without waiting for permission.

Free buses: making relief immediate

“Getting on a bus without worrying about a fare hike or whether you’ll be able to get to your destination on time will no longer be deemed a small miracle, because we will make buses fast and free.”What this signals: Free buses are not presented as a transport reform alone. Mamdani frames them as a daily indignity that government has normalised.By choosing buses, he prioritises a policy that delivers immediate, visible relief across income and community lines. The political logic is clear: once a fare disappears, its return must be justified publicly. This shifts the burden of explanation from government to opponents.

Universal childcare: treating time as public infrastructure

“The cost of child care will no longer discourage young adults from starting a family, because we will deliver universal child care for the many by taxing the wealthiest few.”What this signals: Mamdani does not frame childcare as a labour-market efficiency measure or a demographic fix. He frames it as freedom from economic coercion.The emphasis on “starting a family” reflects how childcare costs reshape life choices in New York. By calling for universal provision, Mamdani is moving childcare from the realm of private sacrifice into that of public obligation.The speech deliberately avoids details on timelines or mechanisms. Its purpose is to establish childcare as a priority that must be funded, not a programme that can be deferred.

Rent freeze: turning housing into a political confrontation

“Those in rent-stabilised homes will no longer dread the latest rent hike, because we will freeze the rent.”What this signals: This is the most legally constrained and politically charged promise in the speech.Housing regulation in New York involves state law, courts, regulatory boards, and powerful landlord interests. Mamdani is aware of these limits. By promising a rent freeze anyway, he is forcing responsibility into the open.If the freeze is blocked, the focus shifts from inevitability to obstruction. The policy’s power lies as much in exposing who controls housing outcomes as in delivering immediate relief.

Public safety: redefining the role of policing

“New Yorkers will create a new Department of Community Safety that will tackle the mental health crisis and let the police focus on the job they signed up to do.”What this signals: Mamdani avoids abolitionist rhetoric. Instead, he reframes public safety as a system misaligned with its tasks.By separating mental health and social crises from policing, he positions this as a functional correction rather than an ideological overhaul. This allows the proposal to appeal both to communities harmed by over-policing and to voters concerned about order and response times.

Collectivism as policy logic

“We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.”What this signals: This line provides the connective logic for Mamdani’s policy agenda.Free buses reduce individual coping costs. Childcare reduces private improvisation. Rent freezes reduce solitary negotiation. Community safety reduces personal risk management.Collectivism here is framed not as ideological conformity, but as shared infrastructure for shared problems. Mamdani argues that New York’s fragmentation stems not from diversity, but from the privatisation of survival.

Defining “New Yorker” as a shared condition

“No matter what you eat, what language you speak, how you pray, or where you come from, the words that most define us are the two we all share: New Yorkers.”What this signals: Mamdani deliberately subordinates cultural difference to civic identity.“New Yorker” in this framing is not about heritage or ideology, but about shared exposure to high costs, long commutes, housing insecurity, and economic pressure. This allows Mamdani to justify universal policies without targeting specific groups.Relief is framed as something owed to New Yorkers as a class defined by material reality.

Governing without apology

“I was elected as a democratic socialist and I will govern as a democratic socialist.”What this signals: This line functions as narrative discipline.Mamdani is signalling that there will be no ideological softening once in office. Supporters are told not to expect triangulation. Critics are told not to feign surprise. The mayor is locking in expectations early to avoid accusations of bait-and-switch politics later.

“We will transform the culture of City Hall from one of ‘no’ to one of ‘how?’”What this signals:This is the most operationally significant promise in the speech.“No” is how bureaucracies preserve themselves. “How?” demands justification. It forces agencies, regulators, and higher levels of government to explain obstruction publicly.Mamdani is committing to governance that makes limits visible rather than quietly absorbed. Even failure, in this model, becomes politically useful if it clarifies where power lies.