The document contains a single URL - www.eTelangana.org - repeated over 100 times. It provides no other text, images, or meaningful information. The document solely consists of numerous repetitions of the same URL.
The document contains 30 repetitions of the URL www.eTelangana.org. It provides no other text, images, or meaningful content beyond this repeated URL address.
The document lists page numbers for the website www.etelangana.org spanning 32 pages without providing any other context or information. It appears to be a listing of page numbers for a website related to Telangana but no specific content is described.
This document contains 10 repetitions of the URL www.eTelangana.org. The URL www.eTelangana.org is mentioned 10 times without any other text or context provided.
The document discusses an alternative design for the head works of the Polavaram Project in India. The original design proposed a large dam and reservoir, but this was opposed by the states of Orissa and Chhattisgarh as it would submerge villages in those states. The alternative design proposes constructing three low barrages instead of one large dam, which would store the required water without submerging villages in the other states. This would allow the project to proceed without their consent. The author, a retired engineer, argues that the alternative design deserves consideration as it could help complete the project faster while minimizing displacement of people and submergence of villages.
The document contains 40 repetitions of the URL www.eTelangana.org. It provides no other text, images, or meaningful content beyond listing the same web address multiple times. The high-level summary is that this document exclusively and repeatedly lists a single URL without any other discernible information.
2014 03-28 125115-krota_vekuva_kosam (1)Pruthvi Azad
?
The document repeatedly lists the same website address, www.eTelangana.org, over 40 times without any other text or context. It appears to solely consist of multiple listings of this single website address.
This document summarizes and compares the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Ordinance of 1942 enacted by the British in India and the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act of 1958 enacted after Indian independence. It finds that the 1958 Act granted significantly broader powers than the 1942 ordinance, including applying to paramilitary forces, allowing use of force to disperse assemblies of 5 or more people, and barring legal complaints without government permission. While the 1942 law aimed to protect British military interests, the 1958 law was not necessary and grants an overly broad "license to kill" out of line with principles of a democratic country.