IIPM NEW-DELHI

Saturday, January 16, 2010

The Mahatma gandhi family tree

HARILAL GANDHI

(Eldest son)

He was married to Gulab. They had five children, two daughters Rani and Manu and three sons Kanti, Rasik and Shanti. None of the children is alive anymore. Rasik and Shanti died in childhood.

RANI

Eldest daughter Rani was a homemaker. She had four children, Anushrya, Prabodh, Neelam and Navmalika.

Anushrya

Anusharya is not alive. Anushrya has two children, Lekha and Rahul. Lekha works in a hospital as medical techno;ogist in St.Louis, US. She has two sons, Dev and Amal. Rahul has two children, Anup and Avnee. He is business director in Washington University.

PRABODH

Prabodh is not alive. He was a doctor. He did his MBBS/MD in Mumbai but worked in a village in Saurashtra. He has two children, Sonal and Prayag. Sonal lives in Mumbai with her two children, Rachana and Gaurav. Rachana is a doctor and Gaurav is a computer engineer. Prayag has two children, Prachi and Darshan. They study in Saurashtra.

NEELAM PARIKH

Neelam Parikh has one son, Sameer. He is an eye surgeon, runs his own private practice in Navsari, Gujarat. He has three children, Siddharth, Gopi and Parth.

NAVMALIKA

Has three children, Parul, Manisha and Ravi. Parul and Ravi live in Toronto, Canada. Parul is a physiotherapist (private practice). She has two children, Sarthak and Anil, both students. Ravi is a computer engineer. He has two children, Neel and Akash. Manisha, too, is a physiotherapist in Nagpur. She has two children, Milli and Daksh. They are students.

KANTI

(Harilal’s son) He was married to Saraswati Ben . He is no more. He was a doctor. He did his MBBS from Madras. He worked in a dispensary in a mill and treated the workers of the mill. They had two sons. First son, Shanti, is a heart specialist. He is married to an American lady called Suzanne. He has three daughters, Anjalee, Anita, and Alka. They live in the US. The second son, Pradeep, is married to Mangla. He is a CA. He lives in Washington, US. He has two daughters, Priya, Megha.

For Complete I I P M Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source : IIPM Editorial, 2009

An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative

Read these article :-
Delhi/ NCR B- Schools get better
IIPM fights meltdown
IIPM News
1 LAKH COPY SOLD in less than ten days of Prof. Arindam Chaudhuri's new book Discover The Diamond In You

Friday, January 15, 2010

Kings and queens still have their feet washed by villagers of the world’s largest democracy

That Bolangir was to then take a steady downward spiral into deprivation and despair even as Singhdeo passed away in 1975, did not, however, change the fortunes of his family that, after him, continued on a winning streak at the hustings. Following Singhdeo’s death, his two sons Rajraj and Anang Udaya took on the family’s new-found political mantle; while Rajraj was elected twice to Parliament from Bolangir, younger brother Anang Udaya made it seven times to the state assembly, and even became minister twice in Naveen Patnaik’s cabinet. It wasn’t to stop there. Kalikesh Narayan Singhdeo, Anang Udaya’s son who joined politics in 2004, was elected to the state assembly as a BJD candidate, while Rajraj’s son, Kanak Vardhan, has made it to the state assembly four times as a BJP candidate from Patnagarh, becoming a minister in the BJD-BJP alliance government from 2000 to 2009. His wife, Sangita Singhdeo, has won from the Bolangir parliamentary seat thrice as a BJP candidate.

And just what sees them through? “They owe it to their clean image,” says Bhagwan Mishra, a royal family supporter. “They never indulge in corruption and maintain a clean image before the public. They also never refuse anyone who seeks their help in anything.”

Political rivalry meanwhile has slowly eaten its way into the royal family. The split between the BJD and BJP resulted in family members locking horns in the last elections in 2009. While Kanak Vardan fought against his sister-in-law Prakruti Devi, his wife Sangita fought against her brother-in-law Kalikesh. In that battle while Kanak Vardan won the approval of the people, his wife and three-time MP lost to Kalikesh. “I want to do something for the people of Bolangir,” Kalikesh, who has become an MP from the constituency for the first time, tells TSI. “People have great faith in our family and I don’t want to ever let them down.”

In all of this, it is the Congress that seems to have taken a beating having chosen the wrong candidates in the first place. And the yardstick for political performance in Bolangir is not quite the same as it is in the rest of the country. “Everybody is the same here,” says Harishchandra Sahoo, a farmer of Khaprakhol, a village in the area. “Everybody comes to us once every five years seeking our votes. But at least members of the royal family do not indulge in corrupt practices. Unlike the others in politics, we know for sure that they at least won’t siphon off a share of the funds allotted by the government for the benefit of the poor.”

Then again, with 60 per cent of the constituency's population living below the poverty line, and 45 per cent of its people still trapped in illiteracy, it isn’t surprising that not many in Bolangir have either the time or the means to fret and fume about the mysterious ways of governance or, for that matter, misgovernance.

For Complete I I P M Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source : IIPM Editorial, 2009

An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Nuclear deal

The US Congress on October 1, 2008, gave absolute endorsement to an accord facilitating nuclear collaboration between the US and India. The agreement is seen as a defining moment in US-India associations and brings in a fresh aspect to worldwide non-proliferation efforts. The agreement lifts a more than 30 years old US cessation on nuclear trade with India by allowing US to offer aid to India’s civilian nuclear regime. However, opposition parties in India maintained that the country’s sovereignty and reputation have been sold out. On the other hand, several US politicians are of the belief that a gaping fissure has been knocked into the NPT command and it essentially overturns more than 50 years of US non-proliferation labours undermining efforts to thwart Iran and North Korea from obtaining nuclear weapons, and potentially adds to a nuclear arms race in the continent.

For Complete I I P M Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source : IIPM Editorial, 2009

An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Desperate Invasions

It was extremely shocking for the world that had for so long invested morally in Non-Aligned Movement to understand the Bush’s doctrine of either-you-are-with-us-or-against-us. As Uncle Sam first marched into Afghanistan and later in Iraq, most of the world’s statesmen were caught off the guard. While Taliban was universally despised, Saddam Hussain was sort of an iconic figure of resistance. Naturally, the fall of Baghdad had different reaction to that of Kabul. As sycophants allied nations jumped to eat the spoils of war, developing world started to fathom the meaning of “Global War on Terror”. The Blitzkrieg although won battles for US, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan still continues. As overstretched US army finds difficult to hold grounds in Iraq and Afghanistan, the threat of second Vietnam looms large over America.

For Complete I I P M Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source : IIPM Editorial, 2009

An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative

Monday, January 11, 2010

Brilliant concept of global warming meets!

EU did take the lead and declare to cut its carbon emissions by 20% from 1990 levels by 2020 and is the only region on the planet running a comprehensive Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). However, it refused to commit to any further cuts unless other rich nations reciprocate its earlier gestures. But, in the midst of this heat that has suddenly raised COP 15 temperature by many degrees, Dr. R.K. Pachauri, Chairman of the Nobel Prize winning IPCC, said at the inaugural speech of the summit that “To limit average temperature increase at 2.0 and 2.4° C, the cost of mitigation by 2030 would not exceed 3% of the global GDP. In other words, the so-called prosperity expected in 2030 would be postponed by just a few months. But, we have clearly specified in the AR4 that if temperature increase is to be limited to between 2.0 and 2.4°C, global emissions must peak no later than 2015.”

The Copenhagen Summit started recently with the greatest fanfare in recent times for any international event – rivalled only by the 2008 Beijing Olympics. However, the thriller, even before its screening, has already had its share of controversies with the stealing of certain emails of scientists at the University of East Anglia in UK, the contents of which showed that certain studies cast doubt over the fact that human induced activities cause climate change. This proved to be a panacea to climate change naysayers and a sudden surge of criticisms were hurled at the so called propagandists of ‘left’ leaning legions of policy-makers and governments across the globe trying to take over the capitalist world. However, the jigsaw consists of many more hidden pieces. There are other issues intertwined with carbon and equivalent emission reductions that are on the COP15 agenda but have largely been remained footnotes in the emissions tale.

Firstly, as Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has reiterated on many platforms, funding and technology transfer from developed countries to developing nations to curb, mitigate and adapt to damaging effects of climate change must be made a certainty within the confines of any international treaty. However, the rhetoric by the world’s largest oil and gas companies, coal power plant owners and timber companies largely sidelined India’s stance when the clause about peak oil was introduced some time back by some EU representatives. It was followed by the Chinese per capita reduction commitment and suddenly, India seeing itself as the isolated warrior capitulated immediately. Under the giant garb of standing its ground, it slowly slithered out and positioned itself behind China in curbing its per capita emissions at 2005 levels by 20-25% by the year 2020. Dr. Manmohan Singh has declared that he is going to Copenhagen; and as expected, the developed world is waiting with open arms.

The Danish Government, the hosts to COP 15, sent a statement of Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen to B&E, “I welcome Prime Minister Singh’s announcement of his participation in the climate conference in Copenhagen on 18 December. With the Indian announcement, at present 105 leaders from all over the world will participate. Together, these 105 leaders represent 82 percent of globe’s population, 89 percent of the world GDP and 80 percent of the world’s current emissions. If an agreement can be reached within this group, it could change the future of the globe, thus making Copenhagen the global warming turnaround, we all wish for.” But such sweeping statements about universal wishes from the West almost never mention anything about technology transfer and a funding mechanism to aid developing nations.

Secondly, the soot from the carbon jargon has been so thick that the greatest sink for carbon dioxide, the largest GHG, the global forest cover, has been but forgotten. Brazil, the largest Latin American economy recently declared post negotiations with other Amazon economies that it would only accept and support a climate agreement if it made mandatory for developed nations to use only 10% of their emission reduction targets to invest in afforestion projects. However, Brazil might have just forgotten that China single-handedly emits nearly 50% of the carbon emissions combined by EU and US and it is still a developing economy.

Connie Hedegaard, Danish Minister for Climate and Energy, also the President for COP 15, tells B&E (as she keeps insisting on all forums she goes to), “Failure in Copenhagen is no option.” If her definition of failure is the deal not being signed, it is surprising that nobody’s cared to email her the latest details. For UN Conference Summits are now no more than glorious forums for the global environment ministers to meet each other, have great photo opportunities, discuss and debate to keep up the skills required back home in their senates, tour a little more, and finally pack for the next conference. COP 15 is named COP 15 as it’s the 15th conference since 1995 (each in a different place; next one in Mexico). Apart from these main summits, there’re pre-summit meetings (for example, 183 delegates met in Bonn this year, then in Bangkok, then in Barcelona and so on so forth). So what can one actually look forward to in COP 15? The Obamas, and the Salahis, but of course!

For Complete I I P M Article, Click on IIPM Article

Source : IIPM Editorial, 2009

An IIPM and Professor Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist) Initiative