House panel ready to address gov's concerns over Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill: Rizwan Arshad
Bengaluru: Rizwan Arshad, MLA and head of the Select Legislative Committee that reviewed the Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill, stated that the governor’s action does not signify a rejection of the Bill but rather a request for specific clarifications.
Speaking to The New Indian Express, Arshad downplayed the concerns, especially those surrounding the 74th Amendment, and said, “No exact point of the Act was raised.” He dismissed claims of constitutional flaws in the Bill.
Addressing concerns about the proposed Metropolitan Planning concept, first introduced by the Congress government, Arshad assured that the committee would take the issue seriously. “Metropolitan Planning was proposed when Congress was in power. We will consider all aspects of it moving forward,” he said, noting that the committee remains open to making refinements to the Bill.
One of the most contentious issues has been the proposal to split the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), with critics fearing it could follow the path of the Delhi civic body’s trifurcation, added the report.
However, Arshad remained confident, stating, “Delhi civic body’s trifurcation failed due to unequal revenue distribution. In contrast, we’ve carefully accounted for that, ensuring a balanced approach for Bengaluru’s future. Bengaluru has to be divided for administrative efficiency, and we have taken all objections into consideration.”
Reaffirming that the governor’s request for clarifications was not a setback for the state government, Arshad concluded, “We’re fully prepared to provide all clarifications. There is no cause for alarm.”
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.
HC to decide if gram panchayat members can continue in Manipur post tenure: SC
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday said the high court would decide whether the elected gram panchayat members, whose five-year tenure was over in Manipur, were entitled to continue in their posts in the event of the appointment of an administrative committee or an administrator.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh said it would like to have the benefit of the view of the high court in the matter and set a three-month time frame to adjudicate the legal question.
"The question that falls for consideration in this case is that whether the elected member of the Gram Panchayat whose five-year tenure is over was entitled to continue as members of the gram panchayat in the event of appointment of administrative committee or administrator, as contemplated under Section 22 of the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act of 1994," the bench noted.
The Manipur government’s counsel said the state could not hold panchayat elections due to the unprecedented violence.
"Since, we would like to have the advantage of the opinion of the high court, we dispose of the special leave petition without expressing any opinion on merits, with the request to the chief justice of Manipur High Court to post the main case before a division bench at the earliest. We further request the division bench, before whom the matter is listed, to provide expeditious hearing with an endeavour to resolve the controversy within three months," the bench said.
The bench noted that provision of Manipur Panchayati Raj Act was amended to substitute the word "cease" with the word "continue" with respect to the tenure of the elected members of the gram panchayat.
The petitioners have challenged a high court order and submitted that since elections in gram panchayat could not be held in Manipur for various reasons, the previously elected members of the panchayat were entitled to continue as per the amended Section 22 (3) of 1994 Act.
Section 22 deals with the power of deputy commissioner to appoint an administrative committee or an administrator for a period of six months, which will then oversee the election.
Section 22 (3) of the law says once the administrative committee or an administrator is appointed by the deputy commissioner, the elected members of earlier gram panchayat shall cease to exist.
The top court said what has been challenged before it was an interlocutory order of the high court and the main petition in which the question of law that had been raised was still pending.
The original petitioners before the high court were elected representatives at the fifth general elections for gram panchayats and the zilla parishads who sought a direction to continue in the office beyond the period of five years as stipulated by law as elections were last held in 2017.
They sought to continue as panchayat members till the time the state election commission notified the election for the sixth general elections for gram panchayats and zilla parishads.
On February 29, last year, the high court in its interim order gave liberty to Manipur government to appoint an administrative committee for each gram panchayat and zilla parishad in accordance with law and the provision of the Act.
