PM Modi continues to ignore Karnataka’s pleas on language policy

Bengaluru, Feb 25: A day after Karnataka minister BC Patil felt the need for a law to shoot people who raise pro-Pakistan and anti-India slogans, another BJP MLA on Monday said such people should be shot at sight or exiled to the neighbouring country.

Appachu Ranjan, MLA from Madikeri, said a woman named Amulya had raised Pakistan Zindabad slogan at Bengaluru during a CAA-related meeting.

"People saying Pakistan Zindabad, despite living in our country- eating food and drinking water available here- they should be shot at sight. Or else such people should be exiled to Pakistan, and no one should should show softness towards them and fight cases in their favour," he said at Somwarpet in Kodagu.

Amulya Leona, a woman who raised pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-Citizenship Amendment Act rally in Bengaluru on Thursday, has been booked for sedition and remanded to judicial custody.

She had raised "Pakistan Zindabad" slogans thrice after the organisers, under the banner of "Save the Constitution", invited her to address the gathering in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi.

Agriculture minister Patil on Sunday had expressed the need for a legislation to shoot such people, and said he would make a request to the prime minister in this regard. "A law should be brought in the country that who ever raises slogans against India and in favour of Pakistan, they should be shot at sight. Bringing such a law is important," Patil had said.

Mangaluru, May 12: The Karnataka government has ordered that Dakshina Kannada and Udupi districts be considered as one unit for the movement of people to undertake permitted activities between 0700 hrs to and 1900 hrs.

Principal Secretary and Member Secretary, Karnataka State Disaster Management Authority, T K Anil Kumar, in an order, said that there was no need for different passes for commuting by people between these two districts.

However, people should carry their identity cards issued by their respective enterprises/ companies to show that they are carrying out permitted activities only, he said.

Mangaluru, May 21: The Supreme Court has awarded Rs 7.64 crore compensation to the next of kin of a man who was killed in a crash-landing of Air India Express Flight 812 from Dubai in Mangalore on May 22, 2010. The accident killed 158 out of 166 passengers on board.

The family of the 45-year-old Mahendra Kodkany, which include his wife, daughter and son, were earlier granted Rs 7.35 crore as compensation by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). This compensation will now get enhanced after adding 9 per cent interest per annum (on the amount yet to be paid), to be paid by Air India.

Kodkany was the regional director for the Middle East for a UAE-based company. The aircraft overshot the runway and went down a hillside and burst into flames.

A bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi said: "The total amount payable on account of the aforesaid heads works out to Rs 7,64,29,437. Interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum shall be paid on the same basis as has been awarded by the NCDRC. The balance, if any, that remains due and payable to the complainants, after giving due credit for the amount which has already been paid, shall be paid within a period of two months."

The apex court noted that in a claim for compensation arising out of the death of an employee, the income has to be assessed on the basis of the entitlement of the employee. The top court said: "We are unable to accept the reasons which weighed with the NCDRC in making a deduction of AED (UAE currency) 30,000 from the total CTC. Similarly, and for the same reason, we are unable to accept the submission of Air India that the transport allowance should be excluded. The bifurcation of the salary into diverse heads may be made by the employer for a variety of reasons."

The top court observed that the deceased was evidently, a confirmed employee of his employer. "We have come to the conclusion that thirty per cent should be allowed on account of future prospects", added the court.

The top court noted that if the amount which has been paid by Air India is in excess of the payable under the present judgement, "we direct under Article 142 of the Constitution (discretionary powers) that the excess shall not be recoverable from the claimants," said the court.