Bengaluru Man Lands in ICU After BP Hits 230 : 'Work is important, but...'

Bengaluru Man Lands in ICU After BP Hits 230 : 'Work is important, but...'

Amit Mishra, the founder and CEO of Dazeinfo Media and Research, shared his shocking experience in a viral LinkedIn post. He described how an ordinary Saturday turned into a medical emergency.

Authored by: Shivya Kanojia

Updated Apr 2, 2025, 23:15 IST

Mishra was immediately admitted to the ICU, where doctors worked to stabilise his condition.

A Bengaluru entrepreneur had a harsh reminder that health should always come first when he was rushed to the ICU after a sudden spike in blood pressure.

Amit Mishra, the founder and CEO of Dazeinfo Media and Research, shared his shocking experience in a viral LinkedIn post. He described how an ordinary Saturday turned into a medical emergency. While working on his laptop, he suddenly suffered a severe nosebleed that would not stop. Within moments, his washbasin was covered in blood, and he feared losing consciousness.

By the time he reached Apollo Hospital, he had already lost a significant amount of blood. The emergency team struggled for 20 minutes to control the bleeding. However, what followed was even more alarming—his blood pressure had soared to a dangerous 230. There were no prior symptoms, no history of hypertension, and no warning signs like dizziness or headaches.

Mishra was immediately admitted to the ICU, where doctors worked to stabilise his condition. Though his BP was eventually brought under control, a new problem arose the next morning when he attempted to walk. His blood pressure dropped drastically, causing him to faint, leaving doctors baffled.

Over the next four days, he underwent multiple tests, including ECG, LFT, ECHO, cholesterol tests, and even an angiography. Surprisingly, all results came back normal. His unexplained BP fluctuations have raised serious concerns, and further tests are still required.

'' The big question: How did my BP shoot up so high and suddenly dropped without warning?

While I am still under treatment, need to go through few more test, this experience left me with some important learnings:

- Your body doesn’t always give clear warnings. High BP, stress, and health risks can be silent killers. Regular checkups are a must.

- Work is important, but health is non-negotiable. We often ignore small signs, thinking we’re fine, until we’re not.

- Emergency preparedness matters. Knowing what to do in a crisis (and where the nearest hospital is) can save lives.

- Medical science still has mysteries. Even after 15+ tests, the cause of my BP spike remains unknown. But what’s clear is that taking care of one’s health is not an option. it’s a necessity,'' the post read.

Reflecting on the experience, Mishra called it an unexpected wake-up call. He questioned how his blood pressure could rise and fall so dramatically without warning. His ordeal has prompted many professionals to reconsider their lifestyles and the toll of work-related stress.

As he continues his recovery, Mishra shared a vital message—no job is worth risking one’s health. His experience serves as a stark reminder to prioritise well-being over professional commitments.

NBEMS launches official WhatsApp channel for real-time updates

NBEMS launches official WhatsApp channel for real-time updates

The platform will offer timely updates on examinations, accreditation, and training of medical professionals

Curated by Arunima Jha

Image by freepik

Apr 02, 2025

The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has launched its official WhatsApp channel to give real-time updates about medical education. Students and stakeholders can access the channel through the following link:[https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VbAseBd7T8bTcZS9mg20].

As per an official announcement made by NBEMS, "In order to enhance accessibility to crucial information, NBEMS has started its official WhatsApp channel, providing a trustworthy platform for real-time updates."

The channel is accessible to candidates, medical colleges, faculty members, and healthcare professionals. It will offer vital updates on:

- Examinations – Schedules for exams, information bulletins, application process, admit cards, and results.

- Accreditation – Details on accreditation procedures, eligibility, and application requirements for institutions applying for NBEMS accreditation.

- Training and Monitoring – Information on counselling for admissions to

NBEMS courses, registration of trainees, guidelines for training, submission of theses, webinars, and academic programs.

Will central govt employees retiring before January 1, 2026 lose out on 8th Pay Commission benefits?

Will central govt employees retiring before January 1, 2026 lose out on 8th Pay Commission benefits?

There is an increased concern among the central government employees and pensioners these days. There is a claim that the Centre is trying to create a distinction between two sets of pensioners - those who retired before January 2026 and the ones who will retire after that, through an amendment in the Finance Bill, 2025.

Written by Mithilesh Jha

April 1, 2025 16:10 IST

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman issued a sharp rebuttal on Tuesday after P Chidambaram flagged a ‘cut’ in capital expenditure. She also accused the senior Congress leader of employing “selective arithmetic and flawed comparisons” to serve 'political rhetoric'.

8th Pay Commission: Will central government pensioners retiring before 1 January 2026 lose out on most benefits under the 8th Pay Commission?

There is an increased concern among the central government employees and pensioners these days. There is a claim that the Centre is trying to create a distinction between two sets of pensioners – those who retired before January 2026 and the ones who will retire after that, through an amendment in the Finance Bill, 2025.

Main Opposition party Congress sees a “hidden agenda” of the central government as far as the recent amendments to the pension rules are concerned. The government, however, maintained that the recent amendments are only a validation of existing pension policies and are not aimed at altering benefits for civil and defense pensioners.

Why did the pension controversy arise?

The issue arose when some changes were made in the Central Civil Services (CCS) pension rules in the Finance Bill 2025. Regarding this, leaders like the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) and Congress MP K.C. Venugopal alleged that the government could deprive pensioners who have retired or will retire before 2026 of the benefits of the 8th Pay Commission.

Amitrajit Kaur of AITUC called it a “betrayal of lakhs of pensioners”, while Venugopal termed it as the “hidden” agenda of the government. Some media reports also said that the 8th Pay Commission could put a financial burden of more than Rs 1 lakh crore on the government, making this change necessary.

But Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman has completely rejected these speculations. Sitharaman, while replying to the discussion on the Finance Bill, 2025, and the Appropriation (No.3) Bill, 2025, in the Rajya Sabha, said that the recent amendments to pension rules are just a validation of existing policies and do not alter benefits for civil or defence pensioners.

The government approved the 8th Pay Commission in January 2025, which will come into effect from January 1, 2026. Its objective is to improve the salaries, allowances, and pensions of government employees and pensioners. This is not a new tradition — every 10 years, a new pay commission comes, which updates the salary and pension according to the time.

The 7th Pay Commission, which came into effect in 2016, ensured that pensioners who retired before and after 2016 would get an equal pension. That is, there should be no discrimination between old and new pensioners. According to government data, by March 1, 2025, about 36.57 lakh government employees and 33.91 lakh pensioners will be affected by this commission.

What does the government say about this pension disparity allegation?

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman clarified the controversy in Parliament on 27 March 2025. She said, “Pensioners who retired before 2016 got equal benefits under the 7th Pay Commission as those who retired after 2016, and this principle will continue.”

She also clarified that the change made in the Finance Bill is only a procedural reform, not any discrimination related to pension. Earlier, on 18 March 2025, she told MPs Kangana Ranaut and Sajda Ahmed that the recommendations of the 8th Pay Commission would be finalised soon and its financial impact would be assessed later. 

So will old pensioners suffer?

No. This entire controversy has arisen from a misinterpretation of technical amendments. The government aims to simplify pension calculations, not to exclude old pensioners.

The 8th Pay Commission recommendations will come by late 2026 or early 2027, and by then, revisions are likely to be made for all pensioners. Earlier too, the government has given one year’s arrears while implementing the Pay Commission, which could reduce financial pressure.

Summing up

So far, there is no concrete evidence that old pensioners will be excluded from the 8th Pay Commission. This controversy has only grown due to misunderstandings and speculations.

According to the Finance Minister’s statement, all pensioners will get the benefit of the Pay Commission. The outline of the 8th Pay Commission recommendations is expected to be finalised by April 2025. In such a situation, pensioners should pay attention to official announcements.

https://www.financialexpress.com/

KWA Service | Once Appointed As Assistant Engineer, Right To Opt For Degree Or Diploma Quota For Promotion Remains Open: Supreme Court

KWA Service | Once Appointed As Assistant Engineer, Right To Opt For Degree Or Diploma Quota For Promotion Remains Open: Supreme Court

Pranav Kumar

27 Mar 2025 2:39 PM

The Supreme Court set aside the Kerala High Court's ruling on a seniority dispute between Kerala Water Authority's 'directly recruited' and 'promoted' Assistant Engineers. The Court held that Kerala Public Health Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 1966 (Subordinate Service Rules) and Kerala Public Health Engineering Service Special Rules, 1960 (Special Rules) govern completely separate cadres. The court further held that Rule 4(b) of the Special Rules applies only after appointment as Assistant Engineer, and cannot be applied for lower promotions.

Background

Six employees of the Kerala Water Authority (KWA) were initially employed as Draftsmen and later promoted to Assistant Engineers. Four of them joined between 2005 and 2014 and were promoted to Assistant Engineers between 2015-2018. Two private respondents - Anoop VS and Bindu S - had joined directly as Assistant Engineers in 2005 and 2017 respectively.

A seniority list released by KWA showed the original Draftsmen as senior to the two directly recruited Assistant Engineers. This was challenged before the Kerala High Court. The two private respondents argued that the other employees had been promoted under the 'diploma quota' and could not later claim benefits under the 'degree quota.'

The Single Judge of the High Court ruled in favor of KWA and private respondents. It was held that Rule 4(b) of the Special Rules required promoted engineers to choose either the diploma or degree quota at the time of their promotion. The Division Bench upheld this decision, stating that employees who entered through the diploma quota could not switch to the degree quota later for further promotions. Aggrieved, Sajithabhai and other similarly situated employees approached the Supreme Court.

Arguments

Senior counsel Mr. Nikhil Goel, representing Sajithabhai, argued that the High Court erred in applying Rule 4(b) of the Special Rules at the stage of promotion to Assistant Engineer. He argued that appointments to Assistant Engineer are governed solely by the Subordinate Service Rules, which provide for recruitment through direct entry (60%) and promotion (40%). Under this scheme, 6% of the direct recruitment quota is reserved for in-service Draftsmen with engineering degrees. He argued that Sajithabhai, despite qualifying for the 6% quota, was promoted under the 40% quota.

Further, Goel submitted that the Special Rules apply only to promotions from Assistant Engineer to Assistant Executive Engineer. Rule 4(b) and its proviso gives an option to Assistant Engineers seeking further promotion but do not dictate how an individual becomes an Assistant Engineer. He further contended that the High Court's interpretation would unfairly disadvantage meritorious candidates who had both a diploma and degree, as it would allow a junior diploma-holder who obtained a degree later to surpass a senior.

Senior counsel Mr. V. Chitambaresh represented Kerala Water Authority and the private respondents. He argued that once the employees chose to be promoted under the diploma quota, they could not later claim seniority based on their degree qualifications. He relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Chandravathi P.K. v. C.K. Saji (2004 INSC 101), which held that once an employee opts for a particular quota, they cannot later switch between diploma and degree streams for promotions.

Court's Reasoning

The Supreme Court first clarified that the Subordinate Service Rules and Special Rules govern different stages of employment. The Subordinate Service Rules apply to recruitment and promotion up to Assistant Engineer, while the Special Rules govern promotions beyond this rank. The Court held that the High Court erred in applying Rule 4(b) to appointments as Assistant Engineers, as this rule is relevant only for higher promotions.

Secondly, the Court held that Rule 4(b) gives an Assistant Engineer (regardless of their mode of entry) the option to choose between degree or diploma quota for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer. The court rejected the High Court's finding that direct recruits and promotees must be placed in separate categories for seniority purposes. Instead, the Supreme Court ruled that once an individual becomes an Assistant Engineer, their future promotions are governed by a uniform framework.

Thirdly, the Court also dismissed the reliance on Chandravathi P.K., noting that the issue in that case was unrelated to the present matter. The court clarified that Chandravathi P.K. dealt with weightage for pre-degree service in determining eligibility for promotion, while the present case is about the applicability of Rule 4(b).

Finally, the Court held that the High Court's interpretation would create an arbitrary distinction disadvantaging meritorious candidates. The court illustrated that a junior diploma-holder who obtained a degree after promotion could overtake a senior diploma-degree holder, leading to absurd results. Citing K.P. Varghese v. ITO (1981 INSC 160), the Court reiterated that statutory interpretation must avoid such irrational and unintended consequences.

Thus, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals and set aside the High Court's judgments. Restoring the seniority lists as originally published, the court held that promoted Assistant Engineers are not bound by their initial quota selection and may exercise their option under Rule 4(b). However, the court clarified that this applies only when seeking promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer.

Decided on: March 18, 2025

Neutral Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 358 | Sajithabhai & Ors. v. Kerala Water Authority & Ors.

Counsel for the Appellants: Mr. Nikhil Goel

Counsel for the Private Respondents: Mr. V. Chitambaresh

Can Assistant Professors In Engineering Colleges Be Re-designated As Associate Professors Without PhD? Supreme Court Clarifies

Can Assistant Professors In Engineering Colleges Be Re-designated As Associate Professors Without PhD? Supreme Court Clarifies

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

1 Apr 2025 9:23 PM

The Supreme Court held that Assistant Professors in Engineering institutes(appointed after March 15, 2000), who did not have Ph.D qualification at the time of appointment or failed to acquire Ph.D within seven years of their appointment, cannot claim re-designation as Associate Professors in terms of the 2010 notification issued by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE).

At the same time, the Court also held that teachers who were appointed in various Engineering institutes prior to March 15, 2000, when PhD was not an essential requirement for the post of Assistant Professor, will receive the benefit and redesignation to the post of Associate Professor as per 6th Pay Commission.

"As far as such teachers are concerned who were appointed prior to 15.03.2000, we do not see any reason to disturb the findings of the High Court regarding their entitlements under the 6th Pay Commission, etc...The appellant shall release the higher pay scale to those respondents who are appointed prior to 15.03.2000 with an interest of 7.5% per annum on the arrears within a period of four weeks from today failing which the interest shall be calculated at the rate of 15% per annum," a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran held.

For the other remaining five Respondent-teachers who were appointed after this date when Ph.D became an essential requirement for the post of Assistant Professor, and they claimed the benefit of re-designation to Associate Professor in terms of higher pay scale but failed to acquire it within 7 years of appointment, relief was not granted.

"Under the circumstances, and in terms of what we have held above, the respondents who were appointed after 15.03.2000, who were non-Ph.D. and had also failed to acquire the same within seven years of appointment as was required, cannot be given the benefit of 2010 notification inasmuch as they cannot be given a higher pay scale or re-designated as an Associate Professor.

The phrase 'incumbent Assistant Professor' in the 2010 notification, to our mind, would only include such Assistant Professors working on the post who had a Ph.D. qualification at the time of their appointment or who though did not have a Ph.D. qualification at the time of their appointment but subsequently in terms of the notification dated 15.03.2000 read with subsequent notification dated 28.11.2005 acquired Ph.D. within seven years of their appointment or those appointed prior to 15.03.2000; when Ph.D. was not an essential qualification, continued uninterruptedly."

The Court added that as and when these teachers acquire a Ph.D, they would be at liberty to move an application before their respective institutes for higher pay and redesignation.

In this case, the Respondent-teachers, who possess a Master's degree, were appointed as Assistant Professors by the Appellant in the institutes between 1995 and 2009. Subsequent to the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE's) notification, the requirement for the post of Assistant Professor was Ph.D as per 5th Pay Commission.

All Respondents entered into an agreement to comply with the AICTE's notification for Ph.D to avail the benefits of the 5th pay revision. In 2005, AICTE again issued a notification stating that the Phd must be completed within 7 years from the date of appointment.

In 2010, the AICTE re-designated the posts in terms of the 6th Pay Commission, requiring that Assistant Professors who have completed 4 years of service in the pre-revised pay scale of pay scale of Rs.12000-18300 on January 1, 2006 shall be re-designated as Associate Professors. The Respondent teachers claimed the benefit of it, but they were denied on grounds that they did not possess a Ph.D degree, which was a mandatory requirement to be an Assistant Professor.

This was challenged before the Bombay High Court, which, relying on the decision of a coordinate bench, allowed the plea and the Respondent teachers were to be re-designated as Associate Professors and be given a higher pay scale as per the 6th Pay Commission. Subsequently, a review petition was filed, which also came to be dismissed. Both these orders were challenged before the Supreme Court.

Case Details: THE SECRETARY ALL INDIA SHRI SHIVAJI MEMORIAL SOCIETY (AISSMS) AND ORS. v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS|SLP(C) No. 7058-7061/2019

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 373

Senior Advocate Ravindra Shrivastava, assisted by Arjun Garg AOR appeared for the petitioner.

NEWS TODAY 2.4.2025

 

Explained: How ChatGPT is creating Ghibli style images

Explained: How ChatGPT is creating Ghibli style images 

ChatGPT's new image generation feature has gone viral, enabling users to create art in the distinctive Studio Ghibli style. This updated AI tool, powered by GPT-4o, generates detailed images pixel by pixel, sparking debate about AI's role in creative processes and intellectual property rights. 

TOI Tech Desk TIMESOFINDIA.COM Mar 31, 2025, 16:43 IST 

Representative image ChatGPT has sparked a viral trend with its new ability to generate images resembling distinctive styles, with Studio Ghibli's aesthetic capturing widespread attention. After OpenAI (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/openai) released the image generation feature to ChatGPT, users worldwide began transforming personal photos and creating artwork reminiscent of beloved classics like "My Neighbor Totoro" and "Spirited Away" with ChatGPT and other AI chatbots as well. 

Social media platforms have been flooded with these AI-generated Ghibli style images, with even OpenAI CEO Sam Altman participating by changing his profile picture to a Ghibli-inspired portrait. But how does ChatGPT mimic an art style that takes human artists years to master? The answer lies in GPT-4o's approach to image generation.

This is how ChatGPT is creating Ghibli style images 

The image generation feature of ChatGPT is powered by GPT-4o's advanced multimodal capabilities, enabling the chatbot to process text prompts and generate corresponding images with precise detail and artistic flair. 

Unlike previous AI image generators like DALL-E 3, GPT-4o employs an autoregressive approach to image creation. This method constructs images pixel by pixel in sequence rather than refining them from noise, resulting in more detailed and coherent outputs. The model's ability to understand context from ongoing conversations also allows users to iteratively refine their images through natural dialogue. 

This update represents a significant evolution not just for ChatGPT but for artificial intelligence systems as a whole. GPT-4o's architecture integrates text, image, video, and audio processing into a single system, enabling seamless transitions between different media formats and more intuitive user interactions. Beyond Ghibli style images, users can create art in various styles and even generate photorealistic pictures. 

To some extent other chatbots like Gemini and Grok can also create images reminiscent of Ghibli style artwork, however the resemblance of ChatGPT remains the most uncanny as of now.

Is ChatGPT allowed to create Ghibli style images 

The popularity of Ghibli style image generation has reignited debates about AI art and intellectual property rights.

OpenAI has not disclosed whether Miyazaki's works were specifically included in GPT-4o's training data, raising questions about the ethical implications of the model's ability to so closely mimic Studio Ghibli's distinctive style. The company claims that GPT-4o includes safeguards against mimicking living artists' styles, though the replication of Studio Ghibli's aesthetic continues to raise complex ethical questions.

Studio Ghibli co-founder Hayao Miyazaki has previously expressed strong opposition to AI in creative processes, describing it as "an insult to life itself." Critics argue that training AI on existing artworks without explicit consent potentially undermines artists' livelihoods and creative control. 

Legal experts note that while artistic styles themselves aren't typically protected by copyright, the reproduction of specific elements from copyrighted works could potentially cross into infringement territory. 

OpenAI emphasizes that the ChatGPT's image generation model's purpose is to augment human creativity rather than replace it.