Mumbai: MSRTC chairman Pratap Sarnaik on Friday told media that a transparent and competitive tender process, conducted without allowing any interference, has helped the bus corporation secure a diesel discount at Rs 5.13 per litre, compared with the earlier Rs 3.He said the additional saving of Rs 2.13 per litre was expected to reduce MSRTC’s annual fuel expenditure by about Rs 240 crore.With the new tender, there will be a significant shift in how MSRTC bought diesel. Until now, the corporation procured fuel largely on a nomination basis from public sector oil marketing companies, without a competitive bidding process, and got a discount of Rs 3 per litre.Sarnaik added that the corporation, burdened with accumulated losses of around Rs 12,000 crore, could not rely only on ticket revenue when daily expenditure exceeded income by Rs 1 crore to Rs 2 crore. The savings in fuel will help curtail losses. “A major breakthrough has come in diesel procurement through this tender. The MSRTC currently consumes around 10.87 lakh litres of diesel every day and purchases nearly 40 crore litres annually, with yearly spending of about Rs 3,400 crore,” he said.At the media conference on Friday, Sarnaik said that to diversify revenue, MSRTC is entering commercial fuel retailing through multi-modal fuel stations at 100 to 110 locations under the public-private partnership model. These outlets will offer diesel, petrol, CNG, LNG and, in the future, EV charging. The initiative is expected to generate around Rs 100 crore annually, with one such project already operational in Dhule. The corporation is also introducing AI-based sensors on fuel tanks and nozzles to curb leakage and irregularities in fuel filling.Till the end of February in the current financial year, MSRTC had already incurred losses of nearly Rs 750 crore.Sarnaik said the corporation began implementing a multi-pronged strategy to create sustainable alternative income streams while tightening expenditure. Advertisement revenue is another key focus area for earning Rs 250 crore over five years.Solar rooftop and solar farming projects are also being rolled out by MSRTC to save energy and generate additional annual income of Rs 10 crore to Rs 15 crore. MSRTC has set a target of earning at least Rs 500 crore in additional income next year through these and other reforms, he added.MSRTC operates over 16,700 buses across 252 depots statewide, with 8,000 new diesel buses expected to join the fleet this year.

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court directed Central Railway to pay compensation of up to Rs 8 lakh to the parents of Suvidh Raut, who died after falling from a moving train between Ulhasnagar and Ambernath station, providing relief after 14 years.Justice Jitendra Jain on Monday did not accept the Railway Claims Tribunal’s finding that Raut’s death was due to trespass. “The tribunal is not an expert to give an opinion based on the nature of the injury that a person may have been knocked down by a moving train while crossing the track. It is for the medical expert and for the eyewitness to do so. In this case, both are not present,” he said.On March 22, 2019, the tribunal rejected the parents’ claim. It held that their son was not a bona fide passenger and his March 29, 2012 death did not occur due to an ‘untoward incident’ as defined under the Railways Act. The definition includes accidental falling from a train.Justice Jain first considered whether Raut was a bona fide passenger with a valid ticket. While the inquest panchnama did not mention that his ticket was found, a co-passenger, Sandip Valvi, who stayed nearby, stated that Raut purchased two tickets as they were travelling together. He said due to the heavy rush, Raut fell from the train. Justice Jain said Raut’s ticket might have been lost due to the fall and subsequent transportation of his body to the hospital. “Since the co-passenger confirmed purchase of tickets,” he followed a Supreme Court decision and said the tribunal’s finding that Raut was not a bona fide passenger cannot be accepted.On the issue of ‘untoward incident’, Justice Jain noted that at the site, there was no eyewitness nor any CR office. Therefore, the station master’s report, the railway police report and the inquest panchnama stating that Raut was knocked down while crossing the tracks “cannot be accepted in the absence of any eye witness.” It cannot be said Raut “died on account of crossing the tracks, ” he added. Allowing the parents’ appeal, he directed the CR to pay them Rs 4 lakh with 6% interest from the date of the accident till payment, subject to a cap of Rs 8 lakh.

NEW DELHI: A Vancouver-bound Air India aircraft going via the east — and not even taking the Gulf war zone route — had to return to Delhi after nearly nine hours of flying on Thursday. The reason: AI has clearance to operate its Boeing 777-300 extended range (ER) fleet to Canada and not the B777-200 long range (LR) version. But on Thursday (March 19), it sent one of its B777 LR to Vancouver from Delhi as AI 185 with a full planeload of passengers which did not have the clearance to enter Canada.Only when the aircraft had flown for over four hours and was in Chinese airspace near Kunming did the airline realise its very costly mistake. It then called the aircraft back to Delhi where according to flights tracking sites, it landed at 7.19 pm Thursday after taking off from here earlier in the day at 11.34 am.

.

Different countries have different protocols for the foreign airlines allowed to fly to their shores. Some allow airline-wise, some fleet-wise and some can give specific approvals for individual aircraft tail number. In AI’s case for Canada, the approval is for B777 ER version and not the LR one.The airline is learnt to have taken a very serious note of this expense mistake and action is being contemplated for those responsible for this lapse. “We learn from our mistakes and the same shall never be repeated. The moment this lapse was realised, the aircraft was called back to Delhi,” said sources.A B777 burns about 8-9 tonnes of fuel every hour, depending on wind flows and other factors. At this time when oil prices are on fire and rupees touches new life-lows on a daily basis, this was one mistake the loss-making airline could have done without.An AI spokesperson said: “Air India flight AI185, operating from Delhi to Vancouver on March 19, returned to Delhi due to an operational issue and in line with established standard operating procedures. The aircraft landed safely, and all passengers and crew had disembarked.”“We sincerely regret the inconvenience caused to our guests by this unforeseen situation. Our ground teams in Delhi had provided all necessary assistance, including offering hotel accommodation, while every effort was made to fly the passengers to their destination at the earliest. The flight departed this morning for Vancouver with the passengers. At Air India, the safety and well-being of our passengers and crew remain our highest priority,” the spokesperson added.

Pilots and passengers flying to the west from over the Arabian Sea since Feb 28 are mentally prepared that their plane may have to return to India. But for a plane to do so while flying west via the east in these days due to a ” human error” has surprised even the most seasoned aviation professionals.

Mumbai: Maharashtra this week became the 13th state to pass a bill to prohibit unlawful conversions. Like Odisha, which brought in such a legislation first in 1968 and was followed by Madhya Pradesh and other states, criminalising religious conversions based on coercion, fraud or marriage based on allurement or deceit, the Maharashtra Freedom of Religion Act, 2026, too mandates a 60-day notice to a district magistrate before a person can convert to another religion.While the bill was passed by both houses of the State legislature on March 17 and 18 respectively, it now awaits the Governor’s assent and a notification in the gazette before it comes into force.Senior counsel and former additional solicitor general Indira Jaisingh said since a challenge to anti-conversion laws of several states is pending before the SC and has been on the daily board for days now, “Political good sense requires that Maharashtra govt awaits the judgement before notifying the law. Going ahead would convey great disrespect to the court while awaiting its opinion on a serious violation of the fundamental right to marry a person of your choice.“On Feb 2, the Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi, in fact, issued notice to the Centre and 12 states on a petition filed by National Council of Churches in India, which claims the laws “incentivise” vigilante groups to take action.The petition filed against the State of Rajasthan and others raised concerns over such laws and questioned their validity. The matter is pending before a three-judge SC bench. Leading civil and constitutional rights lawyers say the law’s provisions could be tested if the basis for action under it is found to be vague. Senior counsel Mihir Desai in Mumbai on Friday said the Maharashtra Act too could be challenged before the SC.While ministers in Maharashtra justify the need to ensure religious conversions are voluntary and transparent and not forced or fraudulent, legal experts point to the Constitutional mandate under Article 25, which protects an individual’s right to practise, profess and propagate faith. Mihir Desai, a prominent civil rights defender, said the law is “to my mind incorrectly worded as ‘freedom of religion’ since it mandates prior notice and nod from authorities for any conversion in future even if it’s for pure freedom of conscience.“Terms such as ‘allurement’ and ‘undue influence’, while defined, leave the meaning and interpretation “broad-based”, said Desai and other lawyers, and “possibly susceptible to misuse”. Former Bombay HC judge Justice (retired) B H Marlapalle said for any criminal action to be attracted, the allegations would need to be specific, unlike what broad terms used to frame the legislation – allurement, ‘divine healing’, ‘brainwashing’, and ‘undue influence’ – would suggest.Lawyers and activists are divided in their reaction to the provision where a child born out of a marriage solely meant for an “unlawful conversion” would be deemed to belong to the pre-marriage religion of the mother, who would also have custody of the child unless court decides otherwise. Some call it progressive, others ‘divisive’ and impinging on the child’s rights.The Maharashtra Bill, naming no religions, referred to “increasing” instances of forceful conversions that affect “social harmony” and SC orders to say it’s subject to reasonable restrictions and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate a religion under Article 25 “doesn’t include right to forcibly convert”.