Don’t air grievances in public, Karnataka CM advices Cong MLAs

Thiruvananthapuram, Feb 21: A school in the city has allegedly denied admission to a boy whose parents did not fill the religion column in the application form, prompting the Kerala education department to seek a report.

The parents, Naseem and Dhayna, had sought admission for their son to the first standard at the St Mary's school, a government-aided institution. They alleged that school authorities had claimed that registration will not be possible on the education department's 'Sampoorna' portal without filling the 'religion' column.

"We were informed by the school authorities that it was not possible to give admission to our child as we wrote 'nil' in the religion column. They claimed that if nil is mentioned, the admission process will not get registered in the school management software of the education department," Naseem said.

Sampoorna is a school management system project implemented by the Kerala education department to automate the system and process of over 15,000 schools in the state.

The parents later approached the ministry and the Directorate of Public Instruction (DPI) to get further clarification.

"The state government officials denied that there were any issues with the software and confirmed to us that the admission process was going on.

When we approached the school authorities again, they asked us to give in writing that we, the parents will take responsibility of any issues that may occur in the future," Naseem said.

The parents then decided not to enroll their son at the school due to the manner in which the issue was handled by the institution. Reacting swiftly, the state government sought a report from the DPI and the deputy director of the education department on the matter.

"We have asked the DPI and the deputy director of the education department to look into the matter and file a report as soon as possible," Education minister C Raveendranath told PTI. The parents said after the news spread, a school official called them offering admission.

"But we decided not to enroll him there due to the approach of the school authorities," he said.

Naseem runs a catering business after returning from the Gulf.

The school management in a release claimed that they sought a letter in writing from the parents to avoid trouble in the future. "When school authorities asked why the religion column was left blank, the parents said they were not interested in filling that part. The parents have that right.

But most benefits given by the government to school children are based on religion. We just wanted to ensure that the parents take the responsibility in case the student misses out any such benefits in the future," the management said.

School authorities maintained they never denied admission to any student. The parents are now looking for admission for their son in other schools in Thiruvanathapuram.

Ravindranath recently claimed in the state Assembly that over one lakh children in Kerala had left columns relating to caste and religion blank in school admission records during the 2017-18 academic year. In a written reply, he said as many as 1,24,147 children had not filled these columns while enrolling in different classes in government and government-aided schools during the period.

Udupi, June 26: BJP leader K Raghavendra Kini has been appointed as the new Chairman of Udupi Urban Development Authority (UUDA) by Government of Karnataka.

A well-known businessman, Raghavendra Kini is also serving as the president of Kunjibettu Consumers’ Multipurpose Co-operative Union.

Along with him, the State Government has appointed Suma Naika, Praveen Kumar Shetty and Kishor Kumar as members of the Authority.

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.