Youths should gain knowledge of history: Dinesh Amin Mattu

Bengaluru, Jun 9: JD(S) patriarch H D Deve Gowda on Tuesday filed his nomination as party's candidate for June 19 Rajya Sabha elections from Karnataka.

The former Prime Minister was accompanied by his sons former Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy and former Minister H D Revanna, state JD(S) chief H K Kumaraswamy and others, as he filed his papers at the office of Legislative Assembly Secretary M K Vishalakshi, who is the returning officer for the polls. JD(S) on Monday had announced that Gowda will be contesting the Rajya Sabha polls.

Announcing the decision, Kumaraswamy had said Gowda decided to contest following the request of Congress President Sonia Gandhi, several national leaders and party legislators, and it was not an easy task to "persuade" him to enter the Rajya Sabha.

The JD(S), which has 34 seats in the assembly, is not in a position to win a seat in Rajya Sabha on its own and will need support from the Congress with its surplus votes. A minimum of 45 votes are required for a candidate to win. If he wins, this will be the second Rajya Sabha entry for 87-year-old Gowda, the first time being in 1996 as the Prime Minister.

Gowda was defeated in Tumkur constituency by BJP's G S Basavaraj by over 13,000 votes in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls. As joint candidate of the then ruling Congress-JDS coalition, Gowda had chosen to contest from Tumkur at the last minute after vacating Hassan-his home turf, to grandson Prajwal Revanna (a current MP).

Election is scheduled on June 19 to fill four Rajya Sabha seats from Karnataka, represented by Rajeev Gowda and BK Hariprasad of Congress, Prabhakar Kore of the BJP and D Kupendra Reddy of JD(S) that will fall vacant on June 25, with their retirement. Today is the last date for filing nominations. With BJP not fielding any candidate against Gowda, his election is likely to be unanimous.

Chennai, Jul 25: Two weeks after a 62-year-old widow accused him of harassment, including urinating outside her house, the Chennai Police on Saturday registered an FIR against ABVP national president Dr Subbiah Shanmugam.

Dr Shanmugam, Professor and HOD, Department of Surgical Oncology, Kilpauk Medical College and Government Royapettah Hospital, has been booked under sections 271 (disobedience to quarantine rule) and 427 (mischief causing damage) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Prevention Act.

The FIR was lodged exactly two weeks after the woman’s relative Balaji Vijayaraghavan filed a complaint with the Adambakkam police accusing Dr Shanmugam of harassing his aunt, who is living alone in her apartment following her husband’s death last year, following an argument over a parking slot. 

The action came after Vijayaraghavan alleged that the police were not filing an FIR due to the ABVP functionary’s “political connections.”

Dr Shanmugam and the woman were living in the same apartment complex in Nanganallur and an argument broke between them over a parking slot.

“He wanted to use our parking lot. We agreed but demanded a nominal charge for using it. He was outraged by our demand and even broke our signboard at the parking lot,” Vijayaraghavan wrote in his complaint.

He also alleged that Dr Shanmugam began harassing her by throwing “pieces of chicken” outside her apartment despite knowing she is a vegetarian.

CCTV footage corroborates with the allegations of urinating outside the residence of the widow. However, the ABVP called the incident as a “malicious and derogatory propaganda” by the Congress’ student wing of NSUI.

"The video shared by NSUI with an allegation of harassment is tampered with and is being used with malafide intentions. The two families have discussed this within their housing society and have already concluded that the harassment allegations were caused due to misunderstandings and are untrue,” ABVP National General secretary Nidhi Tripathi said.

Vijayaraghavan also alleged in his two-page written complaint that the ABVP national president had urinated outside the woman’s apartment gate and had been throwing garbage and used masks at her gate.

In his complaint, Vijayaraghavan also said the family was “concerned about her safety” while asking police to take action against Dr Shanmugam, who he says, “has a bad track record in maintaining rapport with neighbours.”

Also Read: ABVP national president accused of harassing woman, urinating at her doorstep

Chennai, Feb 5: In order to ensure housing for all, the Madras High Court has proposed ban on non-resident Indians from purchasing houses in India, prohibit speculative sale, and impose 100 per cent extra stamp duty on purchase of second house.

The court on its own impleaded the Union housing and finance ministries as party respondents.

It has directed them to answer a series of questions including as to how many families have basic amenity of housing in India as well as in Tamil Nadu, population and housing ratio in the country and in the state, when 'Housing for All' mission of the central government would be achieved.

"Why the government does not consider imposing such restrictions to control escalation of house prices and to provide a house to every family in the country, a division bench of Justice N Kirubakaran and Justice Abdul Quddhose wondered.

Directing the authorities to inform as to whether the central and state have got special schemes to provide housing for the marginalized and economically weaker sections including SC/ST communities, the bench has also sought the details of the number of families that possess more than one house.

"Why the governments do not restrict families/individuals from purchasing/possessing more than one housing unit/flat/plot till "Housing for all" is achieved?

Why not the government charge 100 per cent more or extra stamp duty to discourage buying more than one house by a family while purchasing second house?

Why not the government conditionally allow the families to purchase more than one house provided the said family pays 100 per cent extra statutory dues like property tax, electricity charges, water and sewerage charges on the second property?" the bench said.

This apart, the court also wanted the authorities to know as to why it should not prohibit the NRIs from purchasing houses in India to bring down the cost of housing.

Justifying its directions, the court said "Lakhs and lakhs of people are living on platforms, roads, and cement pipes, slums, under the trees and on banks of water bodies without proper shelter and basic amenities and safety."

It is true that the Centre had taken a policy decision to provide housing unit to every family.

It should be achieved at the earliest, the court said, adding it could become fruitful when restrictions are put on persons who hold more than one housing units.

The court passed the order while hearing an appeal moved by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board challenging a single judge order against acquisition of about 369 acres of private land in Thudiyalur and Vellakinar areas of Coimbatore for a housing scheme.