Firstly, I am also going to be a dissenting voice and just because of that I don't want to be labelled as anti MGP. It is good to have organizations that highlight issues and certainly we don't want Mysore to be another Bangalore. Thats why I support Infosys plan to develop the additional acreage for residential purposes (if thats what it is meant for). That would certainly help de-congest Mysore. Infosyans will then live in their campus and since they have all facilities including entertainment, there's going to be no need for them to come into the city, adding to traffic and congestion.

Also, land value that is going up so much, may stagnate if Infosyans don't go around buying properties in Mysore and stay in their "free'" campus. Better to have such satellite "townships" outside Mysore. Regarding the water supply issue, again, if the data is true, why can't this be brought up in the Public Hearing? I am all for a public hearing, this is like the town hall concept that was written about in another blog related to the Devaraja Market issue. Is the water situation in Mysore because of Infosys fault, or if they are assured so much water and get it, is it their fault? Whose fault is it? Don't we have enough water stored? Why is there a distribution problem?

Sir Mirza Ismail (read the blog item on this person) had predicted that the requirement of water and other infrastructure would need to be drastically increased for future needs. Whose fault is it that nothing was done about it? How come Mysoreans don't install water harvesting devices in their homes and always depend on the government to spoon feed them, everything ? These are not expensive at all to design and install. Perhaps Infosys must also be forced to put up extensive water harvesting devices on their existing and future buildings if they have not done it so far.

Why do some of these organizations jump from one issue to the other. Is there a shortage of people in such organizations that those issues that are on the front burner one day goes to the back burner when another issue comes up? All the noise about Devaraja Market, what happened after the dust settled? Why the deafening silence from the MGP or others? Are we still waiting for the roof to collapse again? thats for another discussion, don't want to dwell on that issue in this topic.

Whether Infosys is justified about the land acquisition or not and to talk about related issues, there MUST be a public hearing. Thats the forum to bring out any faults or inadequacies to light. Thats where questions must be asked: How come Mysoreans now don't get enough water? Whose fault is it and how to correct that? We do need aware citizens to challenge authorities on all these matters. It would be nice if MGP brings these discussions to the public hearing and appreciate their efforts. The general public will surely laud their selfless work.

Infosys has a right to ask for more land & water for its expansion.I am sure our Govt would have otherwise provided if not more at least the same land and water for several industries which would have come up in the same area.I feel Govt by allotting  land and by assuring supply of water in huge quantity is not at the wrong side.Its better to have one sucessful industry then having half a dozen industries shutting down their shutters in the first year of its start.If the water has to be brought from a distance, i am sure Infosys will bear the cost for  uninterrupted water supply and also bear the total expenses Govt spent in doing so.As you all know Infosys not only created a name for itself worldwide but made the world know that India too can be forefront in IT,BT & Animation industry.Today super power countries/MNC's have recognised and are employing our brainstroms cause few companies like Infosys & Wipro made them to look towards India.Insted of going deep into why Infosys need so much land and water, I feel we better look into areas like if the tax payers money is put into proper use. When Govt can move away the green belt area to accomidate houses and industries, what is wrong in Infosys using industrial land for residential use? that to after obtaining clearence from the concerned Govt departments.

I have great respect for MGP and its cry on so many issues,but my request to the members of MGP is insted of criticizing such companies or indindividual, they should focus on issue like drinking water availibilty, price rise and road repairs in Mysore.I support MGP and am always available to them in their fight against the poor maintaince and non availability of basic needs to all of us.    

Friends,

The discussion on the blog is based upon the objections of MGP as reported in the media. Unfortunately, the media has not reported all the points in the objection, and perhaps they cannot for space reasons. However, if the entire document was read, the discussion might be more meaningful. I am therefore giving the document below. The arguments on the blog are interesting, and may become more so after the document below is read in full.

The 30 days notice period is meant so that anybody interested can make himself/herself free to attend the EPH. It is also the mandated period between Notice and EPH.

I am aware that everybody is entitled to his opinion, but I reckon that GVK’s remark “(not Mysore galatta Parishat)” is an unkind one.

Sudhir Vombatkere


*************
DELIVERED BY HAND
25 January 2006



To,
(1) The Deputy Commissioner, Mysore.
(2) The Environment Officer, KSPCB, Mysore.


Sirs,

OBJECTIONS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST TO THE EXTENSION OF EXISTING 315.58 ACRES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PARK OF M/S INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED BY ADDITIONAL 61 ACRES IN HEBBAL INDUSTRIAL AREA, MYSORE

Reference: (1) Final Report and Executive Summary of Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment (REIA) for Expansion of Information Technology Park at Hebbal Industrial Unit, Mysore, September 2005.
(2) Environmental Public Hearing (EPH) to be held on 03 February 2006 in connection with Reference 1 above.

1. General.
1.1. It is understood that information technology (IT) is a growing industry and M/s Infosys Technologies Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Infosys”) is said to be one of the leading corporations in the field. The use of the precious resource of land by Infosys, which is the subject of the EPH scheduled for 03 Feb 2006, needs to be seen in the following contexts:
(1) The extent of land that Infosys IT Park already occupies and the utilization of that land,
(2) The purpose for which additional land is now required by Infosys and the proposed detailed uses of that land,
(3) The extent of land that may be justified for the present purposes in the present land and the intended purposes in the land now in question, and
(4) Whether at all the IT industry in general and Infosys in particular need to be given such large tracts of land in Mysore.
1.2. It is very strange that when the principal aim of the EPH concerns a project on 61 acres of additional land already acquired by Infosys, there is no scale map found attached with the REIA Final Report (FR) or Executive Summary (ES), indicating where the 61 acres lie with relation to the existing 315.58 acres campus of Infosys. This was brought out, during a visit on 10 Jan 2006 to the KSPCB Office in Mysore and a request was made orally to the EO Sri Ramesh Kumar, to provide a map, but to-date no map has been provided. When the land in question is not even defined, it makes the data presented in the FR and ES quite meaningless. The FR and ES therefore deserve to be summarily rejected and the EPH postponed. The omission of a map from the FR and ES indicates very clearly the negligence of KSPCB officials in scrutinizing the documents, the gross professional incompetence of M/s Hubert Enviro Care Systems (P) Ltd, Chennai-600083, that has been employed by Infosys for preparing the REIA FR and ES, and the carelessness of the concerned staff of a high-profile IT corporation like Infosys. In the absence of a scale map, we assume that the additional 61 acres adjoins the present campus of Infosys where fresh construction activity is observed. It appears that an 80 ft road exists between the 315.58 acres campus and the 61 acres in question, but it is not clear whether this road will remain available to the public for use or whether it will be enclosed by Infosys like they have earlier done to many other roads in their 315.58 acres campus.
1.3. It is observed that construction activity is going on in an area adjacent to Infosys’ 315.58 acres. If this area is a part of the 61 acres in question, the construction activity is illegal because environmental clearance has not yet been obtained for it, and indeed the EPH is yet to be held. Further, the official(s) who have granted licence for construction before environmental clearance, and those who have neglected to physically check on the ground need to be penalized. If the construction has pre-empted the grant of environmental clearance, Infosys needs to be penalized for infringement of laws. In any case, this goes to indicate the nexus between Infosys and KSPCB officials, which takes much for granted and does not take public interest adequately into account. Photographs marked P-1 through P-4, taken on 21 Jan 2006 of the on-going construction are enclosed herewith as proof of on-going, illegal construction activity even before the EPH. It needs to be reported here that when the undersigned took photographs from the road, he was warned by a member of the uniformed site security staff not to take pictures as the Works Engineer had prohibited photography.
1.4. There appears to be a nexus between Infosys officials, KSPCB officials and KIADB officials to favour Infosys because, by not providing a map along with the FR, it is possible to cover the on-going illegal construction in the area adjacent to Infosys campus, and possible to infringe upon the easement rights of the public by taking over KIADB and/or village roads, and make the expansion project into a fait accompli case.
1.5. The serious lacunae explained above, are general objections to the expansion project of Infosys, and are sufficient to demand that the present EPH on 03 Feb 2006 be cancelled and a fresh EPH be convened 30 days after a scale map of the area is provided. Furthermore, if the on-going construction is actually being done on the 61 acres in question,
(1) The construction should be immediately stopped and not allowed to commence until environmental clearance is granted,
(2) Infosys should be penalized for starting without environmental clearance, and
(3) Disciplinary action should be initiated immediately by the Competent Authority against the concerned officials of KSPCB and KIADB.
1.6. Notwithstanding the foregoing, our detailed objections are below. We wish to emphasize here that all objections made herein are in the public interest.

2. Land resources.
2.1. Land is a precious resource and government carefully monitors change of its use. The Karnataka Land Revenue Act and the Karnataka Town & Country Planning Act are meant for this purpose. Land for urban-industrial use is almost always land that was in use for agri-pastoral purposes. The acquisition of land by KIADB to form the Hebbal Industrial Area (Hebbal IA) in Mysore is no different.
2.2. The map of Hebbal IA indicates hundreds of plots each of about 5 acres with a unique plot number. This layout was done by KIADB to provide sites for many industries, and accordingly roads were planned and constructed at public cost to provide adequate access to the industrial plots.
2.3. The above layout of industrial plots by KIADB was clearly intended to provide opportunity to industries that are not land-intensive. In any case, the land of Hebbal IA is meant only for industrial use and not for residential use, as that would go against the original intention of acquisition of the land in the context of the overall planning of the urban-industrial area.

3. Roads for public use.
3.1. Infosys was sold 315.58 acres of land in 2002 by KIADB, and this area included around 70 numbered industrial plots and roads developed by KIADB / Government of Karnataka, totalling about 2 km in length. These roads were in use by the public until Infosys enclosed them within their present campus by a high compound wall, forcing the public to use alternative longer routes that waste time, effort, fuel and money. In 2005 another 61 acres parcel of land was sold to Infosys, and this is the area now in question concerning the EPH of 03 Feb 2006. It is not clear which existing village roads and KIADB roads are included in this 61 acres area since the REIA FR does not contain a map to indicate where the 61 acres lie, but if there are any such roads, the use of 61 acres by Infosys for their expansion will once again deny traditional easement rights to the public. This needs to be clarified, and if there is any violation of traditional easement rights, the entire scheme needs to be reconsidered.
3.2. Photographs of the roads that were hitherto being used by the public but are now closed due to Infosys are enclosed herewith, marked as P-5 through P-9.

4. Unfair preference given to Infosys at public cost.
4.1. It is understood that land was sold by KIADB for industries in the past (before Infosys came to acquire its present 315.58 acres campus in Hebbal IA) at the rate of Rs.6,00,000 per acre but years later, when land costs had risen, Infosys obtained 315.58 acres at the lower rate of Rs.3,00,000 per acre. Thus, the cost to the public for benefit to Infosys was approximately Rs.9.5 crores.
4.2. It is understood that the 61 acres now in question was sold to Infosys at the rate of Rs.6,00,000 per acre when the cost per acre for other purchasers of KIADB land in Hebbal IA was Rs.16,00,000 per acre. Once again Infosys has been benefited to the tune of Rs.6.1 crores at public cost.
4.3. Even further, the 315.58 acres and the 61 acres in question are both meant for industrial use, but from the REIA FR and ES, it is apparent that the land is being largely used for residential purposes. This is brought out because the cost of land for residential purposes in Mysore is around Rs.20 lakhs per 40x60 plot (about Rs.3.0 crores per acre), and Infosys is using it mainly for residential purposes after receiving it for industrial purposes at a mere Rs.6 lakhs per acre. This amounts to change of land use and is violative of extant laws and regulations.

5. Water resources.
5.1. From the Proposed Water Balance (FR page 1-11 B) it is seen that Infosys will draw 1,250 cu m of water from KIADB and extract 250 cu m of ground water per day. Of this, the water consumption for residential accommodation, “domestic” and food courts will be 500 + 450 + 250 = 1,200 cu m (12 lakh litres per day). At the scale of 135 lpcd, this indicates that around 9,000 persons will be permanently living within the campus of Infosys, making the industrial area into a mini-township. The precise numbers of residents inside the campus needs to be ascertained and the details made public. But it has been informally ascertained that at present about 4,000 people are resident within Infosys campus and an additional 7,000 persons will be accommodated after the expansion in 61 acres, to make a population of 11,000 people.
5.2. Mysore City is suffering from chronic water shortage, and there are several areas in Mysore City that receive drinking water supply only for about 3 hours once in 3 days. Supplying 12 lakh litres per day to Infosys is obviously at the cost of these areas of Mysore City.
5.3. Augmentation of water supply for Mysore City using ADB loan funds (for repayment of which taxes are being raised on the citizens of Mysore) did not include such industrial water requirements. Thus the industry is receiving the benefits of the ADB loan without bearing any of its burdens. This is unjust and undesirable.

6. Electric power.
6.1. The power requirement of Infosys is 7.5 MW and there will be provision of 6 x 2 MVA and 7 x 7 MVA DG sets (total 61 MVA including standby) for full power generation in case of loss of grid power.
6.2. Much of the power used at night will be for the enormous floor spaces of 4,507,962 sq ft and area lighting necessitated by the very large area of 315 + 61 = 376 acres of campus.
6.3. In a scenario of general power shortage, such profligate use of grid power is not desirable, and when DG sets cut in on grid power failure, the air pollution will be very high. There is no mention made in the FR or ES of how exhaust air pollution and noise pollution due to operation of DG sets will be handled by Infosys.

7. Land use.
7.1. According to the FR page 1-3, the “Total land area” is shown as 280 acres and 62 acres in Phase I and Phase II respectively. At another place, the land presently occupied is stated to be 315.58 acres and the proposed expansion is stated to be 61 acres. This gross discrepancy in statement of fact needs to be resolved at a separate EPH before granting environmental clearance. It also reflects adversely on the professional competence of M/s Hubert Enviro Care Systems (P) Ltd, the environmental consultants to Infosys, and officials of KSPCB. Further, it is understood that existing coconut plantations of about 20 acres with hundreds of standing coconut trees are notified and included in the 61 acres in question. Handing over agricultural area with coconut trees for use in landscaping is not in the best interests of environmental protection. If the coconut trees are not going to be cut by Infosys, there is no need to include the coconut plantation in the 61 acres area sold to Infosys. There is no mention made in the FR about cutting of coconut trees.
7.2. The land is being used for construction of various buildings (for three main purposes) and for landscaping. A stunning 70% of the entire land (264 acres) is dedicated to landscaping according to page 1-9 of FR, with tree and shrub plantations and green lawns. While such use of land may be environmentally acceptable, maintenance of green lawns in 20% of landscaping area (i.e., 50 acres) will call for huge water resources in an area that is water-scarce.
7.3. The FR mentions an Employee Care Centre (ECC), which is nothing but residential accommodation for employees or trainees. This is illegal in an industrial area where land cannot be permitted to be used for any purpose other than industrial. From pages 1-3 and 1-4 of the FR, the land that is used for the software industry itself is a very small percentage of the total land, while the bulk of construction is for residential accommodation with “food courts”. The built-up area of the present and proposed industrial buildings measures 1380463 sq ft and 39200 sq m (421729 sq ft), making 1,802,192 sq ft total. At the same time, the non-industrial (residential) present and proposed buildings make a total of 120471 + 1323799 + 5500 + 6000 + 150000 + 1100000 = 2,705,770 sq ft. Of this, the area for present and proposed food courts (the name given to restaurants) alone is a staggering 120471 + 150000 = 270,471 sq ft.
7.4. The huge additional land available to Infosys (70 % or 264 acres to be used for landscaping) can conveniently be converted to more residential accommodation whenever corporate compulsions make it necessary, compounding the illegality of land use conversion for corporate profit. Thus industrial land has been made available for conversion to residential land (and sale as such, if corporate policy may so require at a later date) in the present situation when MUDA layout land is valued at about Rs.20 lakhs for 2,400 sq ft (Rs.3 crores per acre). Thus sale of industrial land to Infosys at concessional rates in 2003 (Rs.3 lakhs/acre) and again in 2005 (Rs.6 lakhs/acre) allows massive corporate profit of around Rs. 900 crores at public cost.
7.5. The present and proposed expansion of Infosys is land-intensive and wasteful of natural resources. The land sold to Infosys is excessive and denies opportunity to other, smaller industries to grow in the region.
7.6. Infosys can very easily accommodate the construction now planned in 61 acres (and illegally already commenced – please see para 1.3 above) within the existing 315.58 acres campus, and spare the 61 acres of land for other potential industrialists.
7.7. Mr. Mohandas Pai, CFO of Infosys, has stated in the recently declared quarterly results of Infosys that the company’s growth has been hampered by “the lack of land”. The growth of the company should not be at public cost by offering land at concessional rates, and handing over huge tracts of land in Hebbal IA that can easily be converted to any sort of use at a later date according to Infosys’ corporate policy.

8. Effects on Mysore and surrounding areas.
8.1. With facilities such as swimming pool, outdoor games, gymnasium/fitness centre and automated laundry facility as mentioned on page 1-1 of FR, the campus would appear to be a resort rather than an industrial area. While good facilities given to employees may improve work productivity, such change of land use by Infosys may encourage other industries in Hebbal IA and other industrial areas to quote the Infosys precedent to construct living accommodation in their 5 acres industrial plots for their “employees” and thereby secure a regular income.
8.2. The effect of the IT industry (including Infosys) on Mysore has been principally in the phenomenal rise in land value. Accordingly, there has been a huge upward revision of Property Tax in Mysore City since it is based on the Karnataka Stamp Act, and this is placing an unbearable burden on ordinary citizens. Thus, rather than having any beneficial effect the presence of Infosys, which is arguably the largest IT corporation in Mysore, has resulted in serious detrimental effects in terms of rocketing Property Tax.

9. SUMMARY OF OBJECTIONS.
9.1. The EPH scheduled for 03 Feb 2006 must be cancelled and a fresh date given after a 1:50,000 scale map of the area is provided.
9.2. The 61 acres parcel of land in question must be clearly indicated in a contour map of at least 1:50,000 scale showing (1) the present 315.58 acres campus of Infosys, (2) the KIADB and other roads that were enclosed within the boundary wall of 315.58 acres Infosys campus, (3) all roads in the area of 61 acres parcel of land in question and surrounding areas, and (4) the existing coconut plantations. Other relevant land revenue and topographical details must also be indicated.
9.3. If the on-going construction work as reported is actually that belonging Infosys in the 61 acres parcel of land in question, then complete action as in Para 1.5 above against defaulting government officials and Infosys must be taken before giving notice for a fresh EPH.
9.4. If there is any residential construction in industrial land, KIADB must take appropriate action according to the KIADB Act. The residential construction in Infosys’ 315.58 acres campus would appear to attract this provision.
9.5. Demand for about Rs.15.6 crores (actual amount to be worked out by KIADB and made public) must be placed by KIADB on Infosys, being the difference of cost of land due to concessional rate given to Infosys, and the amount realized by KIADB under information to the public.
9.6. Infosys must not be given control over public roads that provide access to the public as on date, including those that may be affected by the 61 acres area in question. KIADB must give an undertaking that no more roads will be taken out of public use in Hebbal IA.
9.7. Infosys can easily expand their facilities within the existing 315.58 acres campus. Already the present 315.58 acres campus has infringed upon the easement rights of the public as Infosys has enclosed roads that were constructed by KIADB, within its compound wall. There is no justification for expansion of Infosys into an additional area of 61 acres. The present 61 acres should be withdrawn from Infosys and offered at Rs.6 per acre in smaller plots to other industries.
9.8. The REIA must be amended to include proposed measures for pollution control of exhaust emissions of Infosys DG.
9.9. Change of land from industrial to residential use by any industry must not be permitted by KIADB, even by quoting Infosys’s action in the 315.58 acres campus.


ENCLOSURES: Nine (9) photographs, numbered 1 to 9.





MYSORE
25 Jan 2006
(Maj Gen S.G.Vombatkere (Retd))
President, Mysore Grahakara Parishat

28.1.2006
Dear Mr.Krishnan,

I am attempting to answer your points (a) thru (d) below.

A Public Hearing is indeed the right place to expose the authorities as you point out, and that will be done. However, the entity that provides the map is that which conducts the REIA or pays a Consultant to carry it out, namely Infosys in the present case (the applicant for environmental clearance (EC)). They need to be told to provide the map by the authorities and not by the public. Thus there will be a time gap between the authorities (KSPCB) requesting Infosys and Infosys producing the map and its being formally made a part of the REIA document. In the present circumstance there is negligence and/or an implicit assumption that the official, mandated, public process of EPH may be treated as mere formality (environmental clearance being accorded is seen as a foregone conclusion). Therefore, in addition to the authorities, the applicant for clearance also needs to be exposed for making such an unwarranted assumption that can only trivialize the entire process of environmental clearance, and make a mockery of the EPH, AS HAS HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PAST IN MYSORE, unknown to most members of the public who do not even know why an EPH is conducted.

The EPH needs to be postponed so that members of the public who did not know about the EPH (and also wish to participate) may get enough time to obtain the Final Report (FR) and the Executive Summary (ES) and make a study of it. Also, those who have already studied the FR and ES may find other aspects that turn up when the text is correlated with the map. Also, it is not an “alleged failure to provide a map” as you write – the REIA FR and ES do not contain a map showing the location of the 61 acres with respect to the present land of Infosys, and nor does the text make a reference to a map. Further, kindly note that the provision of a map is not “to MGP” – the map is to be part of a public document that should be freely available to the public before an EPH. It is the public that should demand a map, it is the KSPCB that should have made sure that a map was included with the FR and ES, it is Infosys that should have provided one without having to be asked. For example, would anybody purchase a plot of land without a map indicating where precisely the land was situated with respect to landmarks?

No, it would not take 30 days to study a map in the present matter. It may take just a few of hours to study the map, depending upon the skill and understanding of the person who studies it, but the availability of those “few hours” to the persons who might study the map may take 30 days. After all, preparing for the Infosys EPH is not the sole job in life that some people have! However, KSPCB has the direct official responsibility and is vested with the necessary authority to study the REIA document and call for data that is missing or wrong or inconsistent. If KSPCB could not find out that the map was missing (if indeed Infosys intended to provide one) in several months, why grudge the public 30 days?

An EPH is fixed by government according to the EP Act. If it is not properly constituted or if the information that is to be provided before the EPH is not made available, there is enough ground to demand postponement. It is not a question of “MGP’s say-so” or anybody else’s. MGP does NOT represent the “public’s voice”, and it has never had any such pretensions. There are elected representatives who are expected to do so, but they have other weighty matters to attend to. However, MGP does represent the voice of a part of the public. The rest of the public who wish to use their voice in this (or any other) matter are always at liberty to do so. To question MGP’s stand on this matter is to take a position on the side of the applicant for environmental clearance and endorse his urgent need for early clearance. The urgent need for early clearance is that construction (for which prior environmental clearance is mandatory) has most probably already been illegally commenced. (“Most probably” because we cannot be 100% sure without a map). If a map had been provided with the FR, it would have been immediately clear (even to KSPCB!) that construction has been started on the 61 acres of land for which clearance was sought. Therefore, omission of the map was possibly not without intent. Was it Scott who sang, “Oh, what a tangled web we weave / When first we practice to deceive!” ? Cover-up is a messy and expensive business, Mr.Krishnan!

I hope the above gives you at least some reassurance that MGP’s stand is not entirely unjustified. I need to clarify that nobody I know is against Infosys (except perhaps for their professional rivals) – the objection is only to what Infosys is doing or has done. And opposing wrong doing and upholding the dignity of the law is a civic duty – or at least that is how we in MGP see it, and I believe we are not alone.

With best wishes,

Maj Gen S.G.Vombatkere (Retd)

Thank you Mr. Vombatkere, for clarifying your stand. Also thanks for mentioning that perhaps I should join MGP or “others” to tackle the Market issue. There are reasons why a person like me would not be able to “join” any organization.

 

Firstly, although I am a Mysorean, I am also an aviator and keep traveling. I’m sure there will be a time that I will settle down here and be able to take up issues locally full time. Until then, I can offer only moral support, write to newspapers and whenever in town, attend any activity that may benefit such an issue. Mysoreans living here all the time whether employed or retired should have been able to take up so many of these issues. You have mentioned a shortage of volunteers and that is astounding that in a city of 10 lakhs (?) population, enough people are not coming to help out. Why is that, I wonder? What is turning them away?

 

Secondly, the “other” organization that I refer to is the ACICM (generally-sometimes it could be another organization) and the MGP work on different things at different times as mentioned by you in your reply. I like to stick to core issues related to Mysore and particularly the Market issue and later perhaps the restoration of other heritage buildings and the Mysore Airport. Since my interests are limited, it won’t benefit an organization such as MGP.

 

Thirdly, I have no interest in taking on big business. They did not become big without hard work and perseverance, especially here in India. Hats of to the likes of N.R. Narayan Murthy and his ilk. He does not have to do anything and can rest on his laurels and his pile of cash but he chooses to do a lot of charity. He believes in wealth creation and distribution, travels economy class, encourages his kids to find their own feet and does a whole lot of charities. I don’t know too many big or small business persons that can do or have the will to do what he has done.

 

As for ACICM, my personal opinion is that these are rabble rousers only and I don’t like their style of staging dharnas at different locations without any result. It is a wonder that they are projected by print media so often. Lots of people and I do mean lots that I spoke with; have mentioned their disgust at this organization. In fact such organizations have the power of turning away genuine people who would like to get involved in issues related to Mysore.

 

I do hope that whatever I write on this blog is taken in the right spirit and should be. Neither I nor anyone I know who are writing, has any malice or ill feeling about the MGP but I have the right, as a blogger, to express my views and ask questions. Nothing like continuing a discussion with civility such as this blog offers. I still do not agree with the MGP stand on the Infosys issue, if at all there is an issue.

 

However, if there’s anything I can do with respect to the Market issue, I’d be looking for help from all quarters and would be also volunteering to help bring about a solution for this issue in particular.

Everyone is trying to justify what he or she have said.. But what is the end result?? come on guys.. we all need to grow up.. Think ahead..

Everyone one is a tax payer and everybody got the fundamental rights.. blah blah.. If the organizations have enough money to pay the lawyers to draft such PIL.. good for the lawyers.. there is employment generated for them.. and if they are doing a honorary work.. still good for them..

PIL in a way is one main problem faced by any development... PIL brings in the delay in implementation and thus esclates the costs.. at the end of the day who is the victim?

Can anyone define this statement "Mysore should not go Bangalore way" - what do they mean by that statement? Would be infrastructure wise or development wise or the comopolitan attitude or what??

Why is the Bangalore always brought into discussions when anyone talks about development?
Being entrepreneur and originally from Bangalore now having made Mysore my home.. I don't know what people mean by that statement.....

Come on ... I have people say "Mysore is not happening", 'Mysore will take long time to develop", People, who reside in Mysore don't have that confidence that Mysore will develop... by these statements.. people have lost hope on development..

Mysore being the major destination for education, but is losing all the talent to Bangalore.. Not one candidate is willing to work in Mysore..

Isn't it the duty of one all to make sure that there are ample opportunities for younger generation to secure good opportunities..

My suggestion is that if you have clout with the administration and authorities, then gain their confidences and make sure things happen the Mysoreans way.. and not against!!

Can anyone stop the autodrivers carrying more than six kids to school? what happened to the yellow flag that they were supposed to have while ferrying the school kids?

I have a lot more questions to ask.. and I did ask them .. All I get in reply.. we will put some serious thought on it!!

WOW!!

Humara Mysore Mahan!!!

Mr. Yerapathy, although your piece on this topic does not talk about the subject in discussion, I'll tell you what I think of going the "Bangalore way" means to me. It means, congestion, overpopulated, polluted, noisy (traffic noise mostly all the time), bad roads, bad planning (or no planning), no scope for easing the transportation problem without a metro rail or other type of mass transit, lack of greenery, extremely dirty, bad drainage that was exposed last monsoon, unauthorized layouts, large areas of slums (it is embarrasing to go in  a train from Mysore to BLR and while entering BLR, see all the slums and their mushrooming), so on and so forth...my list is as endless as your questions. Having the most number of bars and pubs, discos, pizza joints, movieplexes and such is not the correct indicator for being progressive or "developed" and and thats the only claim to fame as far as Bangalore is concerned. About everyone being a tax payer and having fundamental duties, please check how many tax payers are in Mysore and the small number may astound you, with respect to the population and I think some one forgot at some time that fundamental rights comes with fundamental duties that evey citizen is supposed to do. I think we can discuss this in another blog that Mr. Yerapathi can start, if he feels like.

With respect to this and other blogs, I have been very direct in my opinions because alongwith questions, I do have strong opinions. I oppose the MGP on this Infosys issue as there are really more pressing issues that Mysoreans need to keep on the front burner. In another blog on the Devaraja Market I have said that I am opposed to demolition. I think we need some others who can also voice not only their opinions and ask questions but also to clearly say what they would like to do or like to be done.