Connect with us
Friday,27-June-2025
Breaking News

Business

New IRDAI head can study existing reports, plug gaps

Published

on

Even as strong views are being voiced on the need to review and recast of the two decade old Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI) by industry experts, some experts hold contrary opinions.

“There are reports submitted by various agencies. If these reports are studied and a number of gaps noted and noticed periodically are addressed, I think there may not be a need to have another review,” a former Member of IRDAI told IANS preferring anonymity.

“When a new Chairperson joins IRDAI the above can be the agenda to carry out the mandate envisaged in the preamble of the IRDAI Act,” he added.

According to him, the Standing Committee of Finance and the Parliamentary Committee on subordinate legislation reviews the Regulations and working of Regulators periodically.

“Financial Sector Assessment Programme (FSAP) of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank reviews the regulators including IRDAI periodically to see whether the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS), Insurance Core Principles (ICP) are adhered to,” the expert added.

Financial Action Taken Force (FATF) – the global money laundering and terrorist financing watchdog — also reviews the insurance regulatory bodies from the money laundering angle periodically, he added.

“On the twin aim of IRDAI Act ‘to protect policyholders interests and promote orderly growth of the industry’ IRDAI seems to have done a reasonably good job in the 20 years of its existence,” K.K. Srinivasan, former Member, IRDAI had told IANS.

According to him, a Government review of IRDAI be taken up after reviewing the older financial services regulators like the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI).

“It is time to do a review of IRDAI. It is more than two decades since IRDAI came into existence. As a matter of fact, every regulatory organisation should be reviewed at regular intervals,” N. Rangachary, the first Chairman of IRDAI told IANS.

It was Rangachary who had paved the regulatory path for the sector as the first head of IRDAI.

“There should be a review committee to go into all regulatory aspects. It is time to see whether the original goal of forming the regulatory body has been fulfilled and if not, the action to be taken,” Rangachary suggested.

Echoing similar views was R. Ramakrishnan, Member of the Malhotra Committee on Insurance Reforms.

“It is high time the IRDAI is completely reviewed. This should have been done at the end of the first five years. Better late than never,” Ramakrishan told IANS.

“But the internal organisation of IRDAI needs to be professionalised and strengthened. There is an undeniable perception that compared to its rather small size, there is excessive trade unionism within the Body,” Srinivasan had said.

“This is perhaps attributable to a large extent to the inevitable and somewhat not desirable back-door recruitment of employees in the initial years of its formation. However, this may get corrected in due course when retirements take place,” he added.

One of the areas that needs to be strengthened is the IRDAI’s adjudicatory mechanism.

“With the advent of adjudicatory mechanism that should precede penal action in certain cases, it cannot be said that the adjudication officers have to be continuously well trained and equipped with at least rudimentary legal nuances so as to lend credibility to their performance in quasi-judicial capacity, and recommending penalty with justice and good conscience,” D. Varadarajan, a Supreme Court lawyer specialising in Insurance and Corporate Laws and a Member on KPN Committee on Insurance Laws Reforms.

“In this context, it is also pointed out that unlike the SEBI Act, there is no provision in the IRDA Act, to credit all sums received as penalties to the Consolidated Fund of India. Hence, the penalties imposed have to be just and reasonable, and not excessive, leading to unjust enrichment of the coffers of the Authority,” Varadarajan added.

National

Hindi ‘imposition’ row: Raj Thackeray to organise morcha on July 6

Published

on

Mumbai, June 26: Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray on Thursday announced to organise a morcha from Girgaum to Azad Maidan in Mumbai on July 6 to protest against the “imposition” of Hindi as the third language in Marathi and English schools.

He alleged that it was a conspiracy to destroy the Marathi language, which has recently been awarded Classical Status, saying that the party will not allow the “imposition” of the Hindi language in the state.

Raj Thackeray was speaking to the reporters after meeting School Education Minister Dadaji Bhuse.

“There will be no compulsion in the language, be it Hindi or any other. I am appealing to all the parties that on July 6, we have decided to take out a morcha from Girgaum. There will be no flags in this morcha. It will be a morcha of Marathi people; we are inviting everyone. I have chosen Sunday so that everyone can come,” said Raj Thackeray.

He added that all literary figures, Marathi lovers, film personalities and all political parties should participate in the morcha.

“We should come together for Maharashtra without any arguments,” he said.

Speaking about his meeting with Minister Bhuse, Raj Thackeray said that there is a shortage of teachers for the Hindi language. But the government is saying that it will recruit 10,000 teachers.

“Do you have the money to pay the salaries? There are many big issues before the state, so why is it coming to the language? Is there an attempt to hide something big?” he asked.

“Will you get work in films by learning Hindi? Maharashtra is big because of the education system. Then why this argument in favour of Hindi to make Maharashtra great,” Raj Thackeray said.

“If the government is going to promote arts and sports to increase the merits of students instead of a language, then we have no objection,” he said.

Raj Thackeray said that his party does not accept the government’s stand on Hindi at all.

“We will remain opposed to the imposition of Hindi,” he said.

Continue Reading

Business

No toll proposed for 2-wheelers, says Nitin Gadkari amid viral reports

Published

on

New Delhi, June 26: Union Minister for Road Transport and Highways, Nitin Gadkari, on Thursday dismissed media reports suggesting that two-wheelers will be required to pay tolls on National Highways from July 15.

He called the reports misleading and clarified that no such proposal is under consideration.

Taking to social media platform X, the Union Minister said: “Some media houses are spreading misleading news about toll tax being levied on two-wheelers. No such decision has been proposed.”

“Two-wheelers will continue to be exempt from tolls. Spreading such baseless news without verifying the facts is not responsible journalism. I strongly condemn it,” the Union Minister stated.

The clarification comes after a report claimed that toll payment would soon be made mandatory for two-wheelers at all national highway toll plazas, and that riders would need to equip their vehicles with FASTag.

The report also claimed that violators could face penalties of up to Rs 2,000. This comes just days after Gadkari announced a new annual FASTag pass worth Rs 3,000 for private four-wheelers, aimed at simplifying toll payments and reducing congestion.

Set to launch on August 15, the pass will be valid for one year or 200 trips — whichever comes first — and can be activated via the Rajmarg Yatra app or official websites of the NHAI and the MoRTH.

The government has significantly expanded its highway infrastructure in the last decade, with the total length of national highways increasing from 91,287 km in 2014 to 1,46,204 km in 2024 — a rise of over 60 per cent.

The pace of highway construction has also tripled from 11.6 km/day in 2014 to 34 km/day in 2024.

As of now, 1,366 highway projects covering 32,366 km are under construction across the country, many of which are expected to be completed in phases by FY 2028.

With a 570 per cent increase in the road transport and highways budget over the last decade, the Centre continues to prioritise infrastructure development — but for now, two-wheeler riders can rest assured that tolls are not on the horizon.

Continue Reading

National

SC agrees to hear plea against Maratha quota law in July

Published

on

New Delhi, June 26: The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear, in July, a plea challenging the decision of the Bombay High Court, which had directed that the interim order passed last year, allowing the Maratha community to avail 10 per cent reservation in educational institutions and public employment, will continue to remain in force.

After a lawyer mentioned the matter for urgent listing, a Bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and N.K. Singh assured of listing the plea on the re-opening of the top court (i.e. after July 14).

In an order passed on June 11 this year, the Bombay High Court allowed the Maratha community to provisionally avail the benefit of 10 per cent reservation, subject to the final outcome of the petitions challenging the validity of the contentious Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backwards Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024.

The SEBC Act, allowing 10 per cent quota for the Maratha community, was passed by the previous Eknath Shinde-led government in February last year after the Justice (retd) Sunil Shukre-led Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC) opined that “exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations exist” to grant benefit of quota to Maratha community beyond the 50 per cent threshold.

Notably, the Supreme Court had struck down a similar quota law enacted by the Maharashtra legislature in 2018 for having breached the 50 per cent cap fixed in the 1992 landmark Indra Sawhney case (Mandal Commission case).

A five-judge Constitution Bench, in its judgment passed in May 2021, had opined that it could not find any exceptional circumstances or extraordinary situation for allowing a 12-13 per cent quota for the Maratha community and struck down the Maharashtra Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2018.

Further, the Supreme Court had declared that states do not have the power to prepare lists for socially and educationally backward classes and ruled that the President had the sole power to identify a community as backward.

It had also declined to entertain the review plea moved by the Maharashtra government seeking a relook at the judgment. Before this, the apex court had dismissed a plea by the Union government seeking reconsideration of the May 5, 2021, judgment.

Continue Reading

Trending