IFF Karnataka hosts NRI family get-together in Riyadh

Mangaluru, Jul 22: City based APD Foundation has mooted the idea of giving state recognition and compensation for ‘Covid Saviors’, namely healthcare workers and civic officials who die in the line of duty in the war against Coronavirus pandemic. This suggestion was formally proposed by Abdullah A. Rehman, Founder & CEO, APD Foundation in a letter addressed to Shri Narendra Modi, Hon’ble Prime Minster of India and Shri B. S. Yediyurappa, Hon’ble Chief Minister of Karnataka on July 22, 2020.

In the letter Mr. Rehman asserts that COVID-19 pandemic has caused widespread devastation in the country and played havoc in the lives of the common man. In this scenario, the healthcare workers, such as doctors, nurses and paramedics along with civic officials have emerged as the saviors of the suffering humanity. They expose themselves to great personal risk while treating Covid patients. Many of them catch infection and a few of them have died. Such persons deserve to be recognized by the government for their supreme sacrifice.

Elaborating the rationale behind the proposal, the letter draws comparisons with practice of soldiers who die on the battlefield being glorified as ‘MARTYRS’. The slain soldiers are decorated posthumously with medals and titles of honour. Their families are provided with generous cash compensation so that the future of their widows, children and parents are safeguarded. They are provided with allotment of land, lucrative business opportunities like petrol pump / gas agency or reservation in government jobs for their spouse and children.

The letter suggests that healthcare workers and civic officials who succumb in the line of duty should also be similarly honoured. “Hence I propose that healthcare workers like doctors, nurses and paramedics who die while treating Covid patients should be recognized as ‘COVID SAVIORS’. Civic officials who are working for the cause should also be included in this scheme. Generous compensation should be paid to their families so that their future welfare is ensured as if they were alive,” Mr. Rehman has written.

The suggestion has been made in the wake of news reports that the Odhisha State Government has announced compensation of Rs. 50 lakhs and state honours for healthcare workers who die on Covid duty. Similarly the French government has announced a major increase in salary to its healthcare workers. In the same manner India too can provide optimum welfare to its health workers and set an example on the world stage.

“Though Covid pandemic is likely to be a temporary phenomenon, there is a need to recognize the service of those who are helping society to overcome this grave crisis. They inspire confidence in the hearts of the common people in the same manner as soldiers in uniform do. Hence I urge you to accept the suggestions made herein and announce the same at the earliest,” Mr. Rehman concludes in his letter.

Copies of the letter have also been sent to Shri Nalin Kumar Kateel, MP, Mangalore, Shri D. Vedavyas Kamath, MLA, Mangalore and Smt. Sindhu B. Rupesh, IAS, Deputy Commissioner, DK District for their information and follow up action.

Mangaluru, Feb 28: In a shocking incident, an engineering student has committed suicide on the railway track at the Someshwara railway station near Ullal on the outskirts of the city.

The deceased has been identified as S Rayagowda (23) from Belgaum.

It is suspected that he resorted to the extreme step due depression after love failure. Railway police are investigating the matter.

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.