High Court notice to Anwar Manippady, Government

February 1, 2013

Bangalore, Feb 1: The High Court on Thursday ordered an emergent notice to the State government and Anwar Manippady, Chairperson of the Karnataka State Minorities Commission, following a petition challenging the functioning of the Commission and the Chairperson, even after his term ended.

The petitioner, Mohammed Wazir Baig, had moved the High Court against the functioning of the Commission, contending that he was misusing his office and continuing in the post, even after his term got over in February 2012, which is contrary to the Karnataka State Minorities Commission Act.

Section 8 of the Act says that the chairperson's term should not exceed more than three years, but Manippady is continuing in office beyond it.

“As per the Act, the commission comprises seven members, including the Chairperson. In this case, six members of the commission have retired and the Government has done nothing to make appointments, while the Chairperson enjoys power,” the petitioner said.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

No relief for Siddaramaiah in MUDA case as HC junks plea against Governor's sanction

News Network

September 24,2024

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed the petition filed by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah against Governor Thawarchand Gehlot's decision to sanction the complaint and investigation against him in the alleged Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) scam case.

Justice M Nagaprasanna said the facts narrated in the petition would undoubtedly require an investigation.

The court has also said that the Governor's order approving sanction to investigate against Siddaramaiah under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act does not suffer from application of mind, instead has abundance of application of mind.

Meanwhile, the court rejected the request made by senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi to stay the order of the court. The court has vacated the interim order passed on August 19. In the interim order the trial court was directed not to take any precipitative action against Siddaramaiah. On August 17, Governor had approved sanction under section 17 A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 218 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS), citing three applications.

The court said the private complainants were justified in registering the complaint and seeking approval from the governor.

Insofar as private complainants seeking sanction under section 17A, the court said the provision nowhere requires only a police officer to seek sanction from a competent authority. The court further said it is in fact the duty of the private complainants to seek such approval.

Earlier, The High Court had completed its hearing in the case on September 12, and reserved its orders. It had also directed a special court in Bengaluru to defer further proceedings and not to take any precipitative action against the Chief Minister.

The case pertains to allegations that compensatory sites were allotted to Siddaramaiah's wife B M Parvathi in an upmarket area in Mysuru that had higher property value as compared to the location of her land that had been "acquired" by MUDA.

Comments