Udupi: A case has been registered against BJP leader and president of the management committee of Rattadi Shriratteshwara Temple, Naveen Chandra Shetty Rattadi, on charges of sexually harassing a woman representative of the Dharmasthala Self-Help Group. The complaint was lodged at Amasebailu Police Station.

According to the complaint, the 29-year-old woman, a service representative from Rattadi village, had called Shetty on September 2 regarding the invitation for a preparatory meeting of the upcoming Dharmasthala Dharma Rakshana Yatra scheduled for September 5. Shetty allegedly asked her to come to his residence around noon.

When the woman visited his house in Manimakki, Shetty was seated in a chair. After she handed over the invitation, Shetty allegedly touched her hand while receiving it, causing her discomfort. As she prepared to leave, Shetty is said to have forced her to sit beside him, pulled her close, and kissed her on the cheek. The complaint further states that when she tried to leave in shock, Shetty followed her and asked her to return.

CPM demands immediate arrest

The Udupi district committee of the CPM strongly condemned the incident, stating that a BJP leader associated with the Dharmasthala project had brought disgrace while pretending to be involved in the cause of religious protection.

The party alleged that Kundapura MLA Kiran Kumar Kodgi was attempting to shield Shetty and pressurize authorities to close the case, which they described as unacceptable. CPM district secretary Suresh Kallagar said that since the survivor herself has lodged the complaint, police must immediately trace and arrest the accused to ensure justice.

Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.



Bengaluru: The Karnataka government has ruled out any relaxation of the minimum age limit for admission to Class 1 beginning with the academic year 2026-27. Following the refusal, a group of parents continues to press for leniency.

Parents of children who fall under the age of six by a small margin on the cut-off date have met Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar and senior officials from the Department of School Education and Literacy to request an exemption. School Education and Literacy Minister Madhu Bangarappa said that the government will not change its decision, as reported by Deccan Herald.

According to the minister, children must be six years old by June 1 to be eligible for admission to Class 1. beginning with the 2026-27 academic year. He noted that the previous relaxation was a one-time measure that was clearly confined to the 2025-26 academic year.


“If such requests are entertained every year, it will never end. While granting relaxation last year, it was explicitly stated that it applied only to one academic year. From 2026-27 onwards, the rule will be strictly implemented,” Bangarappa was quoted by DH.

Parents argue that the rigid cut-off is affecting children who are short by a few days. One parent was quoted by DH as saying that his daughter would be 12 days short of completing six years on June 1. Such parents would be forced to repeat a year despite being academically ready. Others pointed out that children promoted from LKG to UKG during the 2025-26 academic year are now facing uncertainty over their transition to Class 1.

Few parents also recalled that earlier, admissions were allowed for children aged between five years and 10 months and six years. Parents saw it as a more practical approach, with children born in November and December being disproportionately affected.

The issue of age criterion goes back to a government order issued in July 2022. The order mandated six years as the minimum age for Class 1 admission. Parents of children already enrolled in pre-primary classes, protested against the order and the state deferred implementation, announcing that the rule would come into force from the 2025-26 academic year.

After renewed pressure, the government granted a one-year relaxation for 2025-26, citing the large number of students affected and in consultation with the State Education Policy Commission. While announcing the exemption, the minister had stated that no further concessions would be allowed.