Work in many government banks, offices and firms was affected.

West Bengal and Kerala states were hardest hit by the strike, which was more limited in other parts of the country.

Unions called the walk-out in protest at a Supreme Court ban on the right of government employees to strike because of the disruption it causes.

Trade unions believe government employees are being denied a fundamental right.

“We were left with no choice because the government
didn’t give us a sympathetic hearing,” said Shantha Raju, a leader of the All India Co-ordination Committee of Unions in the Finance Sector.

Calcutta ’shut-down’

The bustling eastern metropolis of Calcutta, the West Bengal capital, was badly affected on Tuesday, with no transport on the streets.

“Hundreds of people were stranded at the city’s international airport as no transport was available,” an official of the Airports Authority of India told AFP news agency.

We were left with no choice because the government didn’t give us a sympathetic hearing Union leader Shantha Raju

Union leaders in Kerala said the strike there had been total.

Worst-hit were state-run banks and insurance companies.

In the financial capital, Bombay (Mumbai), trading was partially affected.

Vijay Bhambwani, CEO of the investment advisers BSPL Indian.com told the BBC’s World Business Report that the strike had achieved its purpose.

“The strike has paralysed the financial markets to a great degree,” he said.

“There is no movement of funds, there is no clearing of cheques and money is not changing hands.”

The strike also affected work in government in the southern city of Bangalore, India’s information technology centre.

Strike ban

The Supreme Court ruled last year that “no political party or organisation can claim a right to paralyse the economic and industrial activities of a state or the nation or inconvenience the citizens”.

A general strike in India last May cost the economy around $320m

The ruling related to cases arising from a major strike in India’s southern state of Tamil Nadu, as a result of which the state government sacked 176,000 employees.

Most of the employees were reinstated after a Supreme Court intervention but only after providing a written apology and pledging not to take part in strikes in the future.

Strikes in India cost the government and industry millions of dollars each year.

Last May, a general strike against privatisation was estimated by trade unions to have cost the Indian economy $320m.

Read source of it on the page

The Financial Services Authority said the company’s treatment of complaints had, in the past, been “biased” against customers.

The insurer is now reviewing all complaints it rejected between January 2000 and 10 February 2003.

Millions of people in the 1980s took out endowments - a type of insurance policy - to finance their mortgages.

The fine is the first to be levied by the FSA for mis-handling complaints about endowment mortgages.

Second chance

The FSA said up to 5,500 people whose complaints were rejected, in fact, may have been genuine and “deserving redress”.

We will not tolerate poor systems which expose consumers to the risk that genuine complaints…are rejected unfairly Andrew Procter, FSA

But their complaints were rejected because the procedures were “inherently not fair and biased against customers.”

Friends Provident said in a statement that it “regrets what has happened”.

“Once the issue was identified, Friends Provident redesigned its processes for
dealing with mortgage endowment complaints, with full implementation taking
place in February 2003,” it added.

Independent have now been appointed to oversee this review of the complaints which were rejected between January 2000 and 10 February 2003.

Andrew Procter, director of enforcement at the FSA, said: “We will not tolerate poor systems which expose consumers to the risk that genuine complaints, which may deserve , are rejected unfairly.

“Friends Provident and its senior management failed to respond in an effective and timely manner to FSA guidance and to correct problems found in its systems when it had reasonable to do so,” he added.

Originaly from:

Mr Snow, who is on a five-day visit to India, said opening of these sectors would provide funds to improve roads, railways, ports and power plants.

He met Indian business leaders and is scheduled to meet the PM and finance minister later in the week in Delhi.

The US is one of the largest investors in India.

Mr Snow told journalists after a visit to the National Stock Exchange in Mumbai (Bombay): “The financial sector is the nerve of any economy. It has so much potential here.”

He said India could only benefit from greater openness.

“Infrastructure issues are at the forefront of India’s future. But infrastructure needs to get financed,” he said.

“US firms have opportunities here and we want to encourage the reform movement.”

On Monday, Mr Snow had visited Asia’s largest slum, Dharavi in Mumbai.

He also visited members of a women’s organisation that uses micro-credit to finance small businesses as well as urgently needed housing.

An estimated 50% of Mumbai’s population lives in shantytowns, open spaces or on .

During his visit, Mr Snow is also expected to focus on the World Trade trade talks in Hong Kong in December.

India is an member of the WTO and the US wants it to use its influence to bring about a trade agreement in the 148-member organisation.

Read source of it on the site

A low profile legal tussle rumbling through a Swiss arbitration body could have a profound impact on the future wealth of leading European football clubs.

The continent’s top clubs are hoping Competition Commission will rule - before the 2006 World Cup in Germany - that they should get greater compensation for releasing players to the tournament.

“This complaint concerns points of dispute between clubs and national teams, particularly concerning clubs making players available to national teams for free for competitions organised by Fifa,” the competition commission said.

The G-14 grouping of clubs which has brought the action includes 2005 Champions League finalists Liverpool and AC Milan, the 2004 winner Porto, as well as Arsenal, Manchester United, Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich.

‘Huge impact’

Clubs pay superstars high wages and want a share of the huge revenues generated by tournaments such as the World Cup, run by Zurich-based Fifa, and the European Championship, run by Uefa.

“We are still awaiting a decision from the commission in Switzerland, but when they come to their decision I think it will have a huge impact on how international football is run, ” G-14 chief Thomas Kurth told the BBC News website.

The G-14 Clubs Juventus, AC Milan, Inter Milan, Manchester United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Bayern Munich, Borussia Dortmund, Bayer Leverkusen, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Valencia, Paris Saint Germain, Olympique Marseille, Olympique Lyonnais, Ajax, PSV Eindhoven, Porto

“They are preparing themselves very well to justify the decision they reach. We are eagerly awaiting that neutral decision over whether we are right or wrong.

“It is not about the clubs wanting the countries to pay the players’ salaries. It is about the fact players appear in major international tournaments, and there are huge revenues coming in, yet the clubs see nothing of this.”

G-14 would like the clubs to have a proportional share of the income.

“If the national team game produces huge revenues thanks to club players there should be a pay-back of some kind,” he said.

Insurance costs

Players who are internationalists play 80% of their matches for their clubs, and 20% for their national teams, according to G-14 estimates.

“Yet Fifa and Uefa give the clubs, who are risking the players, 0% of the money they make,” Mr Kurth observed.

G-14’s Thomas Kurth (r) regularly liaises with top clubs

“Clubs have to pay insurance for the players when they are away on international duty. And if the players come back injured, tired, or out of form, it is another problem for the clubs.”

Fifa figures show the last World Cup in South Korea and Japan in 2002 generated a profit of 140m ($258.6m). This is expected to rise above 200m in Germany.

G-14 also estimates that the central marketing of both the World and European tournaments generates more than 3bn Swiss francs ($2.4bn; 1.3bn) of business.

Fifa and Uefa have pointed out that appearing in their competitions raises the profile of players, and makes them more valuable assets for their clubs.

We need the big clubs but they should also have a bit of respect for the authorities of football Fifa president Sepp Blatter

But Mr Kurth accepts that: “players may take on ‘added value’ from appearing in the World Cup”, but adds that this just means that it is “other clubs who have to pay each other more money in transfer fees for acquiring that added value”.

“Trading in players is not the objective of the clubs. They sometimes need to sell players to balance the books, but it is not the reason for their existence.”

Future of the game

However it does not look like Fifa or Uefa are willing to meet G-14’s demands, whatever the Swiss body rules.

Uefa has refused to acknowledge the existence of G-14 and has warned clubs have to be controlled more closely.

“We have to look after the future of the game as a whole and not just certain clubs,” Uefa stated.

Top G-14 players help attract World Cup audiences at games

And Fifa’s Sepp Blatter has said “as long as this group is not official they will never be recognised”.

Fifa says it has to defend the interests of the 204 national , not the interests of the top European clubs.

“We need the big clubs but they should also have a bit of respect for the authorities of football,” he added.

Mr Blatter also said the G-14 demands are being addressed to the wrong body.

“Fifa does not sit on the money generated by the World Cup and other tournaments,” he said. “It pays a grand total of $264m to the 204 national s and six .

‘Dialogue needed’

Mr Blatter also pointed out that, under Swiss law, Fifa is a “non-profit” association unlike “billionaire clubs” that “have to maximise their own income”.

Top Italian stars feature among the G-14 collection of club players

He said claims such as the G-14’s should be addressed, not to Fifa but to the national football associations which receive the vast majority of the funds generated, and select players for international duty.

Mr Kurth says changes to the game should “be as a result of dialogue”.

“It can’t be done unilaterally, like Uefa did when they got rid of the second round group phase in the Champions League,” he adds.

“But we have been forced to undertake our claim in Switzerland and now wait to see what happens.”