Shiradi likely to be opened for buses in Oct; Rs 250-cr proposal for Charmadi road repair

Bengaluru, June 14: Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa-led BJP government of Karnataka has once again urged the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led union BJP government to release GST compensation worth Rs 10,208 crore that is due for the state.

The request was placed with Finance Minister Niramala Sitharaman during the 40th GST council meeting, in which Karnataka Home Minister and state’s representative to the council, Basavaraj Bommai, participated.

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Bommai said that Rs 10,208 crore was due from the Centre as GST compensation for four four months - from March to May.

“We have requested the Centre to release Rs 1,460 crore - pertaining to GST compensation for the month of March - as soon as possible due to the dire financial conditions of the state,” he said.

Bommai said that the state was confident that the funds will be released soon, noting that Karnataka had recently received Rs 4,314 in GST compensation for three months, between December 2019 to February 2020.

Meanwhile, the state also proposed the Council to reduce penalty for delay in filing GST. Bommai said that while people are made to pay 18% of the tax as fine in delay in payment, Karnataka has asked the Centre to reduce the percentage by half to 9%.

Mangaluru, Jan 7: A ten-year-old boy who suffered severe injuries after drowning in Kadri temple pond died on Monday,

Police said that the deceased has been identified as Sandesh, resident of Athani taluk.

Sandesh drowned while taking a dip in a pond at Kadri Shree Manjunatha Temple on Sunday evening. He was immediately rushed to the hospital in the city, however, he died on Monday morning after he stopped responding to the treatment.

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.