Karnataka CM is a bigger problem than Pakistan for this Anant Kumar Hegde

Bengaluru, May 8: Karnataka Medical Education Minister Dr K Sudhakar along with Home Minister Basavaraj Bommai on Thursday visited Kempegowda International airport for inspection of the screening facility as over 10,000 people from Karnataka stranded in other countries are scheduled to arrive in the state. 

Sudhakar said all safety measures have been taken for the screening and quarantine of all passengers in hotels, hostels, and school buildings.

He appealed to local residents not to panic as adequate safety measures are being taken to prevent any spread of COVID-19 infection.

Bengaluru, Mar 5: Karnataka is facing unprecedented economic difficulties following a Rs 8,887 crore reduction in the state's share in central taxes, cut in allocation under 15th finance commission and a Rs 3,000 crore hit in GST compensation, Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa indicated on Thursday.

Presenting the state budget for 2020-21 in the Assembly, he said Karnataka's share in central taxes has come down by Rs 8,887 crore in 2019-20 as per the revised budget estimates of the central government. Therefore the state's revenue resources have been reduced. Apart from this, Rs 3,000 crore GST compensation will also be reduced as collection from the GST compensation cess is not as expected, the Chief Minister said. "With all this it has become difficult to reach to reach the 2019-20 budget targets and to manage this situation within the bounds of the Karnataka Fiscal Responsibility Act, an inevitable situation has arisen this year to cut down the expenditure of many departments," he added.

As per the interim report submitted by the 15th finance commission, there is a reduction in the state's share of central taxes to 3.64 per cent compared to 4.71 per cent fixed by the 14th finance commission. In view of this, there will be a reduction of Rs 11,215 crore in the state's share of central taxes in 2020-21 budget, when compared to the previous one.

He, however, noted that the allocation recommendation of the 15th finance commission is limited to one year only and the complete report for the period 2021-22 to 2025-26 will be submitted in October 2020.

"Our government will soon submit a revised memorandum to the commission to set right the loss caused to the state with regard allocation for the year 2020-21 and give more allocation for the remaining period," the Chief Minister said. He also said, when compared to the previous year, there is an increase of approximately Rs 10,000 crore for 2020-21 with regards to government employees salary, pension and interest on government loans, but there is no proportionate increase in resources as compared to committed expenditure. "Due to this reduction of the state's share of central taxes as per the 15th finance commission report and other developments, serious difficulties are being faced in resource mobilisation efforts of the state," Yediyurappa said. "This magnitude of economic difficulties was never faced in the previous years by our state," he added.

However, the state's own tax revenue collection is excellent during this year, he said. As compared to the previous year, there is a growth of 14 per cent in State GST collection. "Based on this, in the new budget, efforts are being made to manage the reduction in the share of central taxes by stabilising the state's own resources more", the Chief Minister said.

Karnataka recorded a gross state domestic product growth rate of 7.8 per cent in 2018-19 and Yediyurappa said for the current financial year it is estimated to be 6.8 per cent.

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.