7.5 lakh Muslims, Christians converted to Hinduism in 10 years: Togadia

Mangaluru, Mar 16: As a precaution against the spread of Covid-19, the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) on Monday decided to cut down its premium, non-AC sleeper, Rajahamsa and express bus services from Mangaluru to Bengaluru and Kasaragod following poor patronage.

The cut down in services is as per the direction of KSRTC's Central office that wants bus services to be operated on priority.

KSRTC Mangaluru Divisional Controller S N Arun said that the corporation has decided to cut down 40 trips to Bengaluru. Concerning Kasaragod, it has reduced the number of trips from 40 to 35. "These include a reduction in services to Mysuru and Dharmasthala also," he added.

Bengaluru, May 30: Bengaluru City civic body Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) has slapped a fine of Rs 50,000 on the food delivery startup Swiggy for irresponsible disposal of waste, an official said on Friday.

"Thinking of food is great - Swiggy. Hope you also think of segregating waste and disposing of it responsibly," tweeted BBMP Solid Waste Management Special Commissioner D. Randeep.

Randeep said a penalty of Rs 50,000 was imposed on Swiggy Kitchen at Katriguppe in the city for the violation.

"The incident with respect to waste segregation has been brought to our notice and happened at one of our kitchens in Bengaluru," confirmed a Swiggy spokesperson to IANS without revealing the exact details.

He said the startup is aware of its civic responsibility and has stringent processes to ensure high standards of compliance.

"While we investigate and rectify the root cause of the matter, we are reinforcing necessary awareness on the best practices to be followed amongst our teams and partner network to ensure complete compliance with waste management," the spokesperson added.

Swiggy has been penalised earlier as well for its irresponsible disposal of waste.

Recently, the BBMP’s solid waste management department has also fined an apartment complex Rs 15,000 for not segregating waste into dry, wet and reject categories.

Waste disposal norms for apartments

"Segregation of waste is mandatory in apartments. Onus of enforcing segregation rules lies on the (apartment) association and waste should be segregated as dry, wet and reject," said Randeep.

InClover Grand Apartments at Baiyappanhalli was penalised for the offence of improper waste disposal. Similarly, BBMP marshals also caught and fined some people openly discarding waste in public spaces.

"Dear citizens, please change your old habits. Our marshals are watching and will fine those who throw garbage in public spaces," BBMP Special Commissioner Randeep said.

He shared the photographs of two scooter-borne individuals being caught in the act and penalised at Kuvempunagar in Bengaluru.

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.