CM aspirant Yeddyurappa, 74, worried about infighting in Karnataka BJP

Mangaluru, Mar 8: The Saraswat Co-operative Bank Ltd., celebrated International Women’s Day with a special seminar on Financial Planning for the banks’ women customers. The programme was held on Friday, March 6, 2020 from 4.00 to 6.00 p.m. at Hotel Ocean Pearl Inn, Bejai, Mangalore. Dr. Sukanya Rao, academician and financial planner, was the chief guest and resource person for the seminar. Mr. Srinivas C., Karnataka State Head, Future Generali India Insurance Company Ltd., was the guest of honour.  Mrs. Vimala Anchan, Senior Manager and Branch Head of M. G. Road Branch of Saraswat Bank presided over the function.

In her chief guest’s address, Dr. Sukanya Rao defined empowerment of women as the ability of take one’s own decisions and utilize resources. Quoting global rankings, she said India enjoys a high ranking of being 9th in the world in political empowerment of women, whereas in other sectors we stand abysmally low. In social empowerment of women, India ranks at 120th, in economic empowerment at 124th and health and survival at 135th.

She suggested that the best tool for enhancing these empowerment rankings is education, which will lead to earning potential and result in enhancing social status. “Every year spent in school boosts girl’s wages by 10-20%,” she said “When a girl receives 7+ years of education, marriage gets postponed by four years and she has 2.2 less children.” She advised women to learn to take one’s own decisions. “Learn to take decisions, especially financial decisions, on your own instead of depending on significant others to do the decision making,” she said.

She followed up her talk with an interactive session on personal financial planning. She enlightened the audience on factors influencing our financial decision making and gave different perspectives on prioritizing savings, spending and investment. 

Srinivas C., Karnataka State Head, Future Generali India Insurance Company Ltd., along with Deepak enlightened the women regarding financial safeguards available under Married Women's Property Act (1874).

Established in 1918, Saraswat Bank was the first co-operative bank to provide merchant banking services after it was recognized as a scheduled bank by RBI in 1988. The bank enjoys high proportion of women employees (nearly 75%) and it is a recipient of Best Cooperative Bank Award in 2016.

Fun games were conducted and prizes were distributed to the winners. Bhavanthi Street Branch Head Karthik Shetty welcomed the gathering. Prithvi Pai and Aishwarya rendered the invocation. Naina Shenoy expressed the bank’s Women’s Day greetings. Chilimbi Branch Head Kishore Shetty gave a vote of thanks. Mahesh Nayak compered the programme. Past Branch Head Mamtha Rao was present.

Bengaluru, Feb 17: Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Monday assured that the Centre is committed to stand by its promise of providing Rs 18,600 crore Bengaluru suburban Rail project.

Addressing a press conference after a post-budget interactive session with the representatives of the various trade bodies, industry leaders and others here, she said that the union cabinet has already given its clearance for the long-pending project.

Informing that the central government will have 20 per cent of its capital share in the project followed by another 20 per cent share from the state government, she said "beside this, the union government will stand for a sovereign guarantee for the rest of the 60 percent share, which can be raised through loans from external agencies".

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.