Bengaluru: The sudden transfer of chief secretary of the Labour Department P Manivannan, who had stood up for workers during the Corona lockdown, has given rise to objection by the working class.

While IAS officer Maheshwar Rao has been given the charge in the Department, the member of the Corona Warriors team have expressed shock on hearing of Manivannan's transfer. They have even declared that they were withdrawing from any kind of Corona-related work.

The ire is being expressed even on social media, with the #BringBackManivannan trending. The labour unions are demanding a withdrawal of the transfer, warning of staging a protest otherwise.

Manivannan had recently warned of taking action against factory owners who failed to pay the April salary to their workers. The government is being accused of transferring the officer due to pressure from industrialists.

Manivannan had also objected to the government decision to pass an ordinance on the amendment to the labour law to increase the working hours from eight to 12 without consulting leaders of labour unions.

The government has said that the transfer was due to complaints received against Manivannan on irregularities in supply of grocery kits, but the protesters have pointed out that the officer had refused legislators supply of ration kits, calling this a reason for transfer.

AITUC general secretary M D Harigovind said that the industrialists had objected to opening of an online portal for workers' complaints regarding pay and demanded Manivannan's transfer. “The government has agreed to the demand,” he concurred.

The Aam Aadmi Party and the CPM too have criticised Manivannan's transfer after he had worked effectively in the state government's struggle against spread of Corona.

Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.



New Delhi: In a striking turn that surprised even his regular viewers, Arnab Goswami spent the evening of December 4 taking direct aim at the central government over the ongoing crisis in the domestic aviation sector. The debate, aired on Republic, focused entirely on the severe disruption caused by IndiGo flight cancellations and the state of air travel in the country. The tone was sharp, emotional, and openly critical, raising the larger question of whether this marks a homecoming of sorts for the anchor long accused by critics of being soft on the government.

Goswami began the show by saying the central government had “completely let down” air passengers. He pointed to chaotic visuals from airports in Pune, Ahmedabad and Mumbai, describing passengers packed into crowded spaces, long queues, and travellers lying on the floor with little access to basic facilities. He said anyone travelling with children or elderly parents would understand the distress such situations cause.

According to him, the government often claims to have improved the aviation sector, but the day-to-day experience of passengers tells a different story. He argued that whatever help the government may have extended has benefited individuals and individual companies, not the sector as a whole.

Goswami highlighted data from the last three days, saying IndiGo had canceled 1,232 flights in November. He broke down the reasons for the cancellations: 755 linked to crew and FDTL constraints, 258 due to airspace and airport restrictions, 92 because of failures in air traffic control systems, 127 for other reasons.

He said passengers in India are often “taken for granted” and that only in this country can such large-scale cancellations take place without consequences.

Throughout the debate, Goswami repeatedly returned to the theme of duopoly. He said Air India and IndiGo together control 91.5 percent of the aviation market, leaving only a small share for others like Akasa and SpiceJet. This, he said, gives the two big players the power to decide prices and escape accountability.

“They can set the prices. They can torture passengers. They can be not answerable for air crashes.” He added.

Goswami also questioned why such a structure is allowed to exist if the government claims it opposes monopolies. He asked whether the government has made Air India accountable after the recent air crash, and said he did not believe so.

“We are told that the Modi government does not like monopolies. First of all, I don't agree with that. There are too many monopolies happening.” He said.

The anchor accused Air India of operating aircraft that were not airworthy and said no serious action followed. According to him, any other minister in charge of civil aviation would have been removed after such incidents, but nothing happened.

“He is not answerable. And why is the central government not bothered about it? Because he comes from the TDP, an alliance party. So let him do,” he said.


He added that Air India continues to seek government support, including compensation for losses after the Sindhur episode. Goswami questioned why public money should be used to support the airline, drawing a comparison with the earlier controversy involving Vijay Mallya seeking help from the Manmohan Singh government a move that was labelled as scam.

Goswami said passengers are suffering because of delayed flights, sudden cancellations, and lack of compensation. He criticised the DGCA, saying it was not enforcing safety and operational norms. He also questioned why the Prime Minister’s Office had not intervened.

He noted that Republic had carried multiple exposés on these issues and claimed that Air India chooses to give interviews and advertisements only to other channels.

He also called for Parliament to debate the aviation mess and examine whether monopolies or duopolies should be allowed in a nation of India’s size.

“I'm sure the government's not going to be happy with us saying this, but someone's got to speak up for the people of this country.” He added.

Known by his critics as the “Godi Media Chief”, Goswami’s direct attack on the Modi government over civil aviation raised eyebrows across media circles.

Whether this is a one-off outburst or a sign of a new editorial direction is something viewers will be watching closely.