Help poor, needy by not cutting their salaries: Karnataka CM

Bengaluru, April 7: Karnataka government on Monday allowed bakeries and related product food units in the state to open and function with minimum staff amid a coronavirus nation-wide lockdown.

A circular issued by Rajendar Kumar Kataria, Secretary to the government said, "The Central government has permitted the functioning of food units engaged in bakery and biscuit, condiments, confectionery and sweet for manufacturing, supply and operating retail outlets with minimum staff/labour."

The circular said these units shall strictly follow the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Department of Health and Family Welfare, Karnataka government with regard to the preventive measures to be ensured for combating COVID-19.

"It is stated that all employers shall ensure that these units maintain high standard of health, hygiene, sanitation and social distancing. The units shall not permit serving/dining in the premises and only parcel/takeaways are permitted," the circular added.

Mangaluru, May 25: D V Sadananda Gowda, Union Minister for Chemical and Fertilizer, has once again written to the Ministry of External Affairs urging to take steps to operate more repatriation flights from Gulf countries to Karnataka. 

In his second letter in 10 days addressed to Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, Union Minister for External Affairs, expressed regret over not giving due priority for the repatriation of Kannadigas in the middle east during the extended second phase of Vande Bharat Mission. 

"I shall be grateful if you could personally intervene and instuct the concerned in arranging flights to Mangaluru and Bengaluru from Gulf countries in existing schedule itself," Mr Gowda urged Mr Jayashankar. 

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.