3 duped Malayali women return home from Saudi after Embassy intervention

Mangaluru, Jan 8: No bandh-like situation prevailed in the coastal district of Dakshina Kannada, despite a nationwide strike called by trade union employees. Day-to-day activities are not disturbed, as buses and auto-rickshaws are moving as usual. 

However, in Bunder area, one of the business hubs of Mangaluru city, most of the shops today remained shut. As a result business was partially hit in the coastal city.

In other parts of Mangaluru city business firms, and market places are also open. Schools and colleges have not declared a holiday. government offices are also functioning as usually.

However, branches of many banks, excluding SBI, are closed for customers.

Members of various trade unions took out a rally and staged a protest in front of the Town Hall in Mangaluru.

Along with minimum wages, cancellation of contract labour system, no privatisation, welfare of farmers and other demands were also highlighted by the protestors. 

Slogans were also raised against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and anti-labour policies of his government. 

Members of AITUC, TUCC, AIUTUC, AIDYO, AIBEA, BSNLEU, INTUC, AIIEA, and associations of Anganwadi workers, mid-day meal workers, medical representatives, KSRTC employees, gram panchayat employees, and others took part in the protest.

Mangaluru, Feb 12: Mangaluru City Corporation’s (MCC) mayoral elections will be held on February 28, Urban Development Department has announced.

Yashwanth V, Regional Commissioner of Mysuru will be conducting the election in the city.

The election will be held as per the 21st term reservation roster according to which the mayoral candidate has to be a BCM ‘A’ candidate and the deputy mayoral candidate must be a woman from the general category.
 

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.