10 Indian beaches including one in Udupi to be converted into global quality

Mangaluru, May 5: Even though India is all set to bring back Indian nationals stranded abroad through special commercial flights, no flights have been arranged for the repatriation Kannadigas stuck in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the first phase (May 7 to May 14). However a few flights will fly from Saudi to Kerala and Delhi.

The government is likely to introduce flights from Saudi Arabia to Karnataka (Bengaluru and Mangaluru Airports) in second or third phase.

Fill the Form

All Indian nationals in Saudi Arabia who seek repatriation are supposed to fill form in the following link: https://t.co/K5Hbmr4cFP 

Meanwhile, the Indian Embassy in Riyadh has clarified that the purpose is only to collect data and no decision has been taken yet regarding resumption of flights.

High airfare

Even though some GCC governments paid the ticket fares to bring back their citizens, the government of India has clarified that it will not pay the ticket fares of Indian nationals stranded abroad. It is predicted that tickets on repatriation flights from Saudi Arabia to India could be costlier than regular airfare.

Only asymptomatic can travel 

As per Standard Operating Protocol, medical screening of passengers would be done before taking the flight. Only asymptomatic passengers would be allowed to travel. During the journey, all these passengers would have to follow the protocols, such as the health protocols, issued by the ministry of health and the ministry of civil aviation," it said in a statement.

Mandatory quarantine

The govt has made elaborate arrangements to conduct medical test on arrival at the Airports. As per plan, based on medical check-up, passengers will be categorised as group A/B/C. Later, they will be quarantined for the mandated days

Respective district administrations have taken steps to quarantine people returning from outside India. Marriages halls, general halls and hostels are being identified for the quarantine.

Bengaluru, May 29: The hotel industry is one of the worst-hit industries due to lockdown, along with the tourism industry. Bengaluru's hotel industry has incurred a loss of around Rs 1200 crore during the lockdown period however, the hotels here are likely to open in June if the State government issues guidelines for the resumption of their services.

Speaking to media, PC Rao, President, Bangalore Hotelier's Association said, "It's not only the loss of business, but we have lost the customer base as well. 
We don't expect any good future for the next six months. There will be a slow down in the business even after opening."

"We have requested our CM to give first preference to the hotels. We are going to restart our business in June if granted permission. Around 10 per cent of the hotels cannot open at all. They are in the stage of merging or closing down position. Few hotels may open after five or six months," he added.

He continued saying that many hotels are for sale but there are no buyers. There are around 21,000 restaurants in Bangalore, 3500 hotels with rooms and restaurant which has an average turnover of Rs 20 crores per day, Rao informed.

"We expect losses of around Rs 1200 crores in these two months. We are giving special online training to all the hoteliers and to our managers particularly to deal with the COVID-19 situation, including how to deal with the guests, employees, how to start the hotel services. 

Each and every manager has already been trained and we are still continuing it. We will conduct face to face meeting as well and brief the managers," said Rao.

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.