Rahim Uchil appointed vice-president of Karnataka BJP minority morcha

Bengaluru, Jun 18: The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) nominated Prathap Simha Nayak, M.T.B. Nagaraj, R. Shankar and Sunil Valyapure to contest in the June 29 biennial elections for 4 of the 7 Karnataka legislative Council seats, an official said.

"Our high command selected 3 of the 4 candidates the state core committee recommended on Tuesday, excluding H.R. Vishwanath, a former Janata Dal-Secular (JD-S) rebel, who lost in the December 5 Assembly by-elections from Hunsur in Mysuru district on a BJP ticket," a party official said.

Nagaraj, a former Congress rebel, who also lost in the Assembly by-election from Hoskote in Bengaluru Rural district on a BJP ticket, was the state housing minister in the 14-month-old JD-S-Congress coalition government, which fell on July 23, 2019 after 17 of their rebels resigned then.

Shankar, who was an Independent and a minister in the former coalition government, was not given the BJP ticket to contest in the December Assembly bypolls though he too resigned from the Ranebennur assembly seat in Haveri district, about 340km northwest of Bengaluru, along with former Congress and JD-S rebels.

Valyapure is the party's grass-root leader from Chincholi in Gulbarga district in the state's northern region, about 586km from Bengaluru.

Valyapure extensively campaigned in the May 2019 general elections and ensured the victory of BJP candidate Umesh Yadav from the reserved Gulbarga Lok Sabha seat, defeating Congress senior leader Mallikarjun Kharge.

Nayak is also the party's grassroot cadre who rose from the ranks to become its Dakshina Kannada district president in the state's coastal region.

As the ruling party has 116 legislators in the 225-member Assembly, all its 4 candidates will need 28 votes each to win the contest.

Of the 7 outgoing Council members, 5 are from the Congress and one each from the Janata Dal-Secular (JD-S) and an Independent.

With 68 lawmakers, the Congress will be able to retain 2 seats and the JD-S one as it has only 34 legislators in the lower house.

The Congress has nominated its outgoing Rajya Sabha member B.K. Hariprasad and outgoing Council member Naseer Ahmed to contest for 2 Council seats.

Of the 75-member Council, the opposition Congress has 37, BJP 19, JD-S 16, two Independents and one Chairman.

Bengaluru, Jun 7: An eminent scientist on Sunday suggested a shift system in schools to prevent spread of the coronavirus and continuing with online classes with focus on project-based learning in a big way to promote creativity.

Former Director General of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) V K Saraswat supported the idea of online teaching in the absence of regular classes in view of closure of schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

But, he said it should be organised in far better and more interactive ways so that delivery of knowledge can be better. The NITI Aayog member stressed the need for schools to have a strategy when they reopen keeping in mind the safety of students.

May be they will have to organise shifts so that within the same space they can handle the students; May be they will have to employ more teachers, and they can run two shifts. "May be half the strength in a class can come in the morning and others in the afternoon.

Or students of first to sixth standard can come in the morning and seventh to tenth can come in the afternoon, Saraswat told PTI. Reopening strategy will have to be worked out by the education department, added the former Chief Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister.

Along with normal classes, online education should be continued as a regular system in future, and promoted in a big way because that is the way technology is going to help delivery of knowledge, he added. Saraswat also raised the pitch for reforms in the education sector, saying India is facing the problem of rote learning.

Rote learning has to give way for more project-based teaching, he underlined. Children should be made to work on projects at home and that can be done online. That will also support the changeover from rote learning to creative learning.

I personally believe the education delivery system -- primary, secondary and college levels -- has to be completely changed because creativity in India is less and creativity would come only if we replace rote learning with project-based learning, Saraswat said.

On some academics holding the view that the marks-based model is killing the education system in India as it does not promote creativity, he said evaluation of any outcome is important. Even when we perform in our normal way, evaluation cannot be replaced.

Otherwise, you cant find out how much you have succeeded in delivery. Certainly evaluation cannot be dispensed with. He did not agree with some experts, who favoured a single, uniform system for school education in India by dispensing with CBSE, ICSE and state boards. I am not for normalising everything in life.

I personally believe variety should be there. This concept of one kind of a system is okay for a Communist society, society which was trying to drive everybody like a herd, he said.

Creativity comes with variety, and there is nothing wrong in having different kinds of education system, but one thing which is important is we have to integrate vocational training as part of the education curriculum," Saraswat said. Vocational part cannot be kept away from the education system, he added.

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.