Mangalurean Dr Amitabh Anand among top 50 best business professors in the world

In the wake of Saudi Arabia's assurance that Masjid al-Haram of Makkah and Masjid an-Nabawi of Madinah will be opened for believers after some days, a message has gone viral on social media claiming that both the holy mosques will open on Ramadan 8 (May 1).

The message which was widely circulated on Facebook and WhatsApp, also contained certain condition such as people should fetch their own prayer mats and that they should not use the washrooms in the mosques. 

Clarification

Meanwhile, the authorities of the two holy mosques, issued a clarification that the claims made in the viral post are false and baseless.

"The message being circulated about the opening date for Haramiain (two holy mosques) for public is completely baseless and false. The suspension of prayers for general public is still in effect," they said in a social media post.

Bengaluru, Jan 5: B S Yediyurappa-led Karnataka cabinet has finally decided to resume supply of subsidised rice and wheat to students of welfare institutions and hostels including those run by religious mutts under the Dasoha Scheme’s welfare programme. The supply was stopped over two months ago.

“Cabinet has decided to continue supply of subsidised foodgrains (rice and wheat) for the benefit of 37,700 children under the Dasoha scheme in 351 welfare institutions for the next one year at the cost of Rs 18 crore,” said J C Madhuswamy, Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister. Under this scheme, institutions that provide free accommodation and food for students are entitled to avail 10 kg rice and 5 kg wheat per student every month at subsidised rates. But following a central government directive in November, the state government had stopped supply to private institutions since December.

Hours before the cabinet meeting, Khader addressed a press conference and said, “This government is snatching away food from children by stalling the supply of foodgrains. Institutions like Suttur Mutt, Siddaganga Mutt that have worldwide fame for their service are being inconvenienced by this,” Khader said.

Finding itself in a fix, especially in a matter that involves mutts, the cabinet was quick to restore the supply. “Foodgrains were being supplied to 183 government-run institutions and 281 institutions run by private entities. As per a central government directive, supply to private institutions was stopped but the decision was made by the previous government,” Shashikala Jolle, Women and Child Development Minister, said.

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.