BJP opposes Greater Bengaluru Authority, says it fails objective of Constitution
Former Deputy Chief Minister and BJP MLA C.N. Ashwath Narayan, raising his voice after the tabling of the Bill in the Assembly on Tuesday, said, 'As per the Constitutional objective, local bodies are functioning. To ensure freedom for local bodies, the 73rd and 74th Amendments were brought into the Constitution. Specifically, in the 74th Amendment, Section 243 clearly states that there should not be interference. Through this Bill, all the powers of the local bodies have been taken over by the state government.'
He further said, 'The state government has stooped down to the level of taking away the powers of corporators. The reality is, they won't have time to look into their own work. In matters of development, management, and planning, there will be interference. There is no provision under the Constitution for the creation of the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA).'
Ashwath Narayan underlined, 'The head of the state is the Chief Minister, and the head of the GBA is also the Chief Minister. The freedom and empowerment that should have been given to local bodies are taken away through this Bill. The Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, overall, intends to interfere, and this is evident.'
He demanded that complete freedom must be given to local bodies as per the 74th Amendment. 'I demand that the government give more powers to local bodies and ensure decentralisation of power. Local bodies are not getting the authority to collect taxes. If the CM and Dy CM interfere, how will you save democracy?' he questioned.
Appealing to Congress legislators, he said, 'Many of you have been elected from local bodies; protect their rights. If Constitutional objectives are failed, the judiciary will intervene and take over our role. Do not bring this situation.'
Ashwath Narayan further questioned, 'Why was the PIL filed against the GBA Act? What are the objections? Dy CM Shivakumar should reveal this.'
Leader of the Opposition R. Ashoka stated, 'I oppose the proposed name 'Greater Bengaluru'. Can't you find any other name in Kannada? You must think. Was 'Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike' not fine? Why use an English name? Mumbai has now become 'Maha Mumbai'. Shivakumar is doing great injustice to Kannada. Remove the word 'Greater'.'
He further said, 'Secondly, the concept of decentralisation has been damaged and freedom taken away. The corporation should have been independent, but you have made it a parasite by dividing it into five divisions. If one corporation collects good revenue, another will go bankrupt. There won't be enough money. They will come under the grip of the government.'
Ashoka added, 'Former PM late Rajiv Gandhi brought the 73rd Amendment to the Constitution, but this Bill goes against its objectives. Is that right? What benefit will the people of Bengaluru get from this Bill? This is not decentralisation of power. Since Dy CM Shivakumar is in charge of Bengaluru, there is centralisation of power. We don't want this. You may have the majority and get it passed, but this is not in the interest of society. Roll back this Bill.'
Congress MLA Rizwan Arshad stated, 'This is only a small amendment for the sake of clarity. The government's intention is to ensure no interference in the administration of city corporations.'
Responding to criticism, Dy CM D.K. Shivakumar said, 'There must be clarity in this matter. Bengaluru needs proper governance. Let us discuss this for a full day if needed. Opposition members have more experience than us, and I am ready to accept their suggestions. If there are flaws in our draft, we will correct them. There is no secrecy here."
"We even formed a House Committee for open discussions. Let us first conduct elections. August 18 was the last date for objections, August 25 is the deadline for the Governor's assent, and the final notification will be issued on September 2. Opinions of opposition leaders will also be taken into account.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
5 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
India is 'Maharaj' in tariffs: White House Trade Adviser Navarro
New Delhi, India is a "Maharaj" in tariffs and it is running a "profiteering scheme" by using discounted Russian crude oil, White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro has said, in yet another sharp criticism of New Delhi. India is 'Maharaj' in tariffs: White House Trade Adviser Navarro Navarro's comments came on a day External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar responded to criticism of India by American officials for its energy ties with Russia, and said the US itself had asked New Delhi to help stabilise global energy markets by buying Russian oil. The White House Trade Adviser also talked about how India is "cosying up to" Chinese President Xi Jinping. The relations between New Delhi and Washington are on a downturn after US President Donald Trump doubled tariffs on Indian goods to a whopping 50 per cent including a 25 per cent additional duties for India's purchase of Russian crude oil. "Prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, India virtually bought no Russian was like almost one per cent of their need. The percentage has now gone up to 35 per cent," Navarro told reporters in the US. Navarro's fresh attack on India came three days after he wrote a piece in the Financial Times slamming the country for its procurement of Russian crude oil. He said the argument that India needs Russian oil to meet its energy requirement does not make any sense. They get chip Russian oil and make refined products which they sell at premium prices in Europe, Africa and Asia, he said, adding "it is purely profiteering by the Indian refining industry." "What is the net impact on Americans because of our trade with India? They are Maharaj in tariff. higher non-tariff barriers, massive trade deficit etc and that hurts American workers and American business," he said. The money they get from us, they use it to buy Russian oil which then is processed by their refiners, he said. "The Russians use the money to build arms and kill Ukrainians and Americans tax-payers have to provide more aid and military hardware to Ukrainians. That's insane." "India does not want to recognise its role in the bloodshed," he said, adding India is running a "profiteering" scheme. Though the US imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on India for its energy ties with Russia, it has not initiated similar actions against China, the largest buyer of Russian crude oil. Defending its purchase of Russian crude oil, India has been maintaining that its energy procurement is driven by national interest and market dynamics. India turned to purchasing Russian oil sold at a discount after Western countries imposed sanctions on Moscow and shunned its supplies over its invasion of Ukraine in February, 2022. Consequently, from a mere 1.7 per cent share in total oil imports in 2019-20, Russia's share increased to 35.1 per cent in 2024-25, and it is now the biggest oil supplier to India. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
New Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Will courts be powerless to intervene if Governor sits over bills passed by assembly: SC to Centre
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre if courts were "powerless to intervene" if Governor sat over bills for years, rendering the state legislature "defunct." A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai made the remark in response to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's submission that courts should refrain from interfering and passing binding directions in such a situation and a political solution can be found to deal with such an impasse. "The assembly, elected by a majority, unanimously passes a Bill, if the Governor does not exercise the proviso under Article 200, it will be virtually making the legislature defunct. The persons who are elected, what is the safeguard for them," the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar told Mehta. The bench continued, "...can we say that however high the constitutional functionaries may be, if they do not act, the court is powerless to intervene in such a situation? Assent is given or rejected, the reasons we are not going into, why he has given or not given. Suppose an act passed by the competent legislature, if Governor simply sits over it for an indefinite period, what will then?" The bench is hearing a presidential reference on the question whether the court can impose timelines for governors and President to deal with bills passed by state assemblies. Mehta said courts should not lay down a precedent in "such an extreme situation" and rather an endeavour ought to be made in finding a solution from within the system. The Centre has challenged the April 8 verdict for ruling the bills pending with the Tamil Nadu Governor were deemed to have been passed. "This deemed to have been passed bill direction is violative of the constitution," Mehta said, arguing courts couldn't substitute itself to the role of another constitutional functionary. Mehta said no timeline could be fixed for President and Governor to act on the bills passed by the assembly as the Constitution itself didn't provide any timeline for these constitutional functionaries. The bench said it is not sitting in appellate jurisdiction to review the April 8 verdict. CJI Gavai said, "We appreciate your timeline argument. But, consider a situation where the Governor ought to act, but sits over four years. What happens to democratic set up or the 2/3 majority by which the state is elected and represents the will of the people?" Mehta said a solution had to be found politically and concluded his submissions on the presidential reference. Senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for Madhya Pradesh government, has commenced his arguments. The hearing would resume on August 26. Earlier, the bench asked the Centre if hands of constitutional courts could be tied if constitutional functionaries refused to discharge functions or there was inaction on the part of the Governor on bills passed by state assemblies. The bench made the remarks after Mehta said if some Governors sat over bills passed by the assembly, political solutions had to be explored by states instead of judicial solutions. CJI Gavai asked Mehta, "If constitutional functionaries do not discharge their functions without any reason, can the hands of a constitutional court be tied?" Mehta said for all problems, courts couldn't be the solution and in a democracy, primacy had to be given to dialogue. Justice Kant weighed in, "If there is any inaction on the part of the Governor, which can vary from state to state, and if an aggrieved State approaches the court, can the judicial review of such inaction be completely barred. Tell us what can be the solution?" Calling for some "flexibility", Mehta submitted, "Suppose the Governor is sitting over bills, there are political solutions which can be adopted. It is not everywhere that the chief minister rushes to the court. There are instances where parleys take place, the chief minister meets the Governor, he meets the Prime Minister and President and solutions are found." The law officer said there were several occasions telephonic conversations were made to resolve the impasse. "For decades, this practice has been adopted to resolve disputes, if any. Delegations go and meet the governor, President and sometimes a middle path is found," Mehta said. He underscored invoking statesmanship and political maturity to end the impasse between the state government and Governor, who is Centre's representative. "I am saying, every problem in this country may not have solutions here in the court. There are problems in the country where you find solutions within the system," he added. Earlier, the CJI said judicial activism should not become judicial terrorism. The chief justice's remark came when Mehta said that elected people who have a lot of experience should never be undermined. "We never said anything about the elected people. I have always said that judicial activism should never become judicial terrorism or judicial adventurism," the CJI told Mehta. On April 8, the apex court while dealing with the powers of Governor with respect to bills passed by the Tamil Nadu assembly, for the first time, prescribed the President to decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by the Governor within three months from the date on which such a reference was received.
India.com
5 minutes ago
- India.com
Chhattisgarh horror: Kanker man abducted, killed by Naxals for hoisting Indian flag on I-Day, ultras accused him of...
The victim, Manish Nureti, was among the locals seen hoisting the Indian flag on Independence Day. Naxal violence: In a horrifying incident of Naxalite violence in Chhattisgarh's Kanker district, a local man who was seen hoisting the Indian flag during Independence Day celebrations in a viral social media video, was reportedly abducted and later killed by the ultras, who accused him of being a police informer. According to the police, the victim, identified as Manish Nureti, along with two others, was taken by a group of armed Naxalites, when they stormed his native Binagunda village under Chhotebetiya police station limits on Monday. An official said the Naxals held a 'Jan Adalat', where Nureti was executed for being a police informer, while the two other villagers were released after a beating. The Maoist ultras put up a poster claiming Nureti was a police informer, which is untrue,' said Kanker SP IK Elesela, adding that the victim's body is yet to recovered, and his kin are being contacted. 'Naxalites frequently visit Binagunda village. In the last one-and-half years, Naxalites have killed four-five people after accusing them of being police informers. However, none of the deceased had any connection to police,' Elesela said, according to PTI. Add as a Preferred Source Meanwhile, Bastar Range Inspector General of Police (IG) Sundarraj P confirmed that Manish Nureti was seen in a viral video where he is participating in Independence Day celebrations and hoisting the tricolor on the occasion. 'A probe is underway in the killing and strict action will be taken against those involved,' the IG asserted. Earlier, a video went viral on social media platforms showing some villagers, including children, unfurling the Tricolour amid slogans of 'Vande Mataram' and 'Bharat Mata ki Jai'. Nureti was one of the villagers seen in the video, police said. As per police sources, the Naxalites were unhappy with Nureti and some others for hoisting the national flag in the village on August 15, PTI reported. (With PTI inputs)
