K. N. Nehru
K. N. Nehru is the incumbent Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) of the Tiruchirappalli West State Assembly Constituency and former Minister for Transport Department in Tamil Nadu state of India. He was born in Neikulam on 9th November, 1952. He has finished his school education. He has been elected to the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly four times, twice from Lalgudi constituency and twice from Tiruchirappalli West Assembly Constituency. He is currently residing at Trichy[1]
Notable development in the transport department
Mr. K.N. Nehru was the transport minister in the DMK government from 2006-2011 . The department underwent remarkable improvements from modernising the bus fleet, improving the frequency of the buses, improving passenger amenities and connecting the new suburban areas of Chennai. New Volvo buses catering the working population was introduced and gradually increased in fleet numbers. All buses were fitted with GPS to better manage fleet frequency and save fuel at the same time. The transport department was organized to meet the opportunity of better coordination amongst various forms of transport through Unified transport authority and ultimately delivery better service to passengers. More than 10000 new buses were introduced all across the Tamil Nadu state. Fuel efficiency was given an important thrust and drivers were educated on importance of managing fuel.
Growth of Trichy region
Some of the notable contribution of the DMK government to the Trichy region are
- Fast tracking of the golden quadrilateral, 4 lane highway NH 45.
- Upgradation of waste collection throughout Trichy.
- Crawford Bridge - decongesting junction bus stand and better connectivity to NH 45.
- Anna Stadium upgrade at Trichy.
Charges
Cases were filed on Mr. K.N. Nehru by the ADMK government. None of the cases have withstood the basic questioning of the court and have been struck down as being vague.
The Madras high court had struct down the controversial Land grabbing cells which were primarily used to torment common people and opposition figures. The court had clearly remarked chance of misuse by officials and ruling government citing broad language used in the act.[2]