Navy's largest patrolling vessel INS Sumitra commissioned

September 4, 2014

Chennai, Sep 4: Aimed at enhancing the Navy's coastal surveillance, its largest offshore patrol vessel INS Sumitra was formally commissioned by Chief of Naval Staff Admiral R K Dhowan here today.

The vessel is the fourth in its class and built on in-house design of state-owned Goa Shipyard Ltd.

INS Sumitra, which was commissioned at the Chennai Port Trust, would be based at Chennai under the operational control of Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Eastern Naval Command.

The ship, which has a displacement of 2200 tonnes and can travel a speed of upto 26 knots, is equipped with state-of-the art medium and short range weapons which include 76mm medium range gun(SRGM), a potent Close-In Weapon System (CIWS), Electronic Support System Sanket Mk III and Communication Intelligence System ELK 7036.

The ship is a well-balanced weapon-sensor platform, with the capability to undertake offshore patrolling, support high value assets and defence of offshore installations.

The latest generation warship will join the Eastern Naval Command fleet for maritime surveillance and coastal security.

Commanding-in-Chief Eastern Naval Command Vice Admiral Satish Soni, Commanding Officer, Commander Milind Mokashi, were present.

As part of formal commissioning of the ship, a Rashtriya Salute was performed and the Naval Ensign and the Indian flag was hoisted onboard for the first time. A

commemorative plaque was also launched by Dhowan and Soni on the occasion.

The first, second and third of the series of 105 meter class of NOPV - INS Saryu, Sunayna and Sumedha were earlier handed over to the Navy by GSL.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Pay the worker before his sweat dries’: Madras High Court cites Prophet Muhammad’s teaching while ordering settlement of dues

News Network

December 21,2025

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.

Comments